Category Archives
December 04, 2007
Scholarly Communication On The Go
It makes sense to use a cell phone for communication. Almost everybody has one nowadays, and a few rely on their cell phone exclusively as their telecommunications device. Most people center themselves around this little handheld device--recently the phone has become a hub for text messages, voicemails, and even email. However, even with all of the abilities that these little gadgets have, the cell phone is not often seen as a mechanism for scholarly communication.
Enter the world of web applications, or webapps. A generation of smartphones are all over the market now, and have been able to surf the internet for a good while, but only recently have people been really formatting webpages specifically for these phones. The advent of new markup languages such as Wireless Markup Language (WML) and the expansion of XHTML to mobile devices have made making these websites relatively accessible.
Consider the iPhone. While not an example of a phone for which a programmer can really let loose on, it is a central point for several developers who have taken liberties to create new forms of communication by using the internet, specially formatted for cell phones. While many social networking distractions are abound (read: Facebook) there are new ways of communication that may--for being conveyed on what many consider a novelty device--prove to be a bit more scholarly.
There is an awful lot of talk about making the iPhone a medium for physicians to learn and communicate. On the other side of the spectrum there are several applications for the same device that unite specialty groups of workers, including wait staff at restaurants. Google-esque Find It and the actual Google Maps app for iPhone make it easy to find information on-the-go and call contacts from search results from the interface.
While all of the above references are specific to Apple's iPhone, many more exist, albeit less standardized. Many are very helpful--including several ebook readers--but as yet there is a lack of a central authority for these independent webapps. Perhaps all this will come with Google's Android platform... but until then the world of cellular webapps is still largely unexplored.
:: Jamion Williams
Posted by colldev at 06:40 PM
November 08, 2007
Web 1.0, Web 2.0, Web... 3.0?
The amazing transformation--both in mindset and technology--of the internet in the last five years or so known as Web 2.0 has been the subject of an overwhelming amount of scrutiny and study. On one hand, the movement has really spurred a new attitude towards web interactivity, creating a more fluid web that brings accessibility to once-distant concepts such as social bookmarking. However, some very notable names, including the creator of the internet (can we say Web 1.0?), have discredited the term as a flimsy attempt to capitalize on innovations that others have already made. Web 2.0, these people say, is nothing more than a bunch of shiny icons accompanied by domain names that cleverly misspell words in order to make a buck. In fact, they criticize, Web 2.0 is actually dumbing down the internet: sure, Myspace is a great social tool and connectivity medium, but it's a downright awful website, reversing years of security implementations in one fell swoop. Why create a Web 2.0, these founders ask, when Web 1.0 was not only working well... but working better?
More after the jump...
In the midst of this argument about the versioning off of such a massive giant, a blogger named Jeffrey Zeldman quietly introduced a term to the blogosphere and stood back to watch what would happen. What if, he asked, we just quit all this 2.0 business and "jump to Web 3.0?" Those who did not eat Zeldman alive for his impropriety simply ignored his creation. There is already an active debate as to the validity of Web 2.0, they said; why should we give any stock to such an obvious attempt to make a buzzword out of thin air?
But perhaps he's on to something, and a few others have bought the hype, too. What was Web 2.0? It was novel, and cool, and altogether sloppy. What self-respecting computer techie would let himself stoop so low as to get a Facebook page? But then again, who doesn't own a facebook nowadays? This sort of separation of utility from quality is a step in the right direction, but true next-gen social bookmarking on the web will only come when websites stop forsaking what they can do for what they've done, and reach out for a new approach to interconnection on the internet... one that doesn't just group a bunch of sub-par websites together and call it the "future".
There are some shining points on the horizon, these supporters of the Web 3.0 concept say. Sites such as twitter are starting to create a stable social platform that reaches far outside the boundaries of the internet. There are plenty more emerging technologies that will one day allow us to use the internet as a desktop to our own virtual computer. Whether or not this will be Web 2.0 or 3.0 is unclear, but we do know that it is a thing of tomorrow, not a thing of today. For so long we have thought that we reached the future, that Web 2.0 was the tomorrow of yesterday promised for so long, but what if Web 2.0 is more than just the ends to the means?
What if these are just growing pains?
:: Jamion Williams
Posted by colldev at 07:30 PM
