What's the Hype Over Skype?

For months now I’ve listened to my friends discuss how they enjoy using Skype. I’ve sat and wondered in amazement about all the hype over Skype and what makes it so great! Clearly, I’ve never used it, but it was still worth learning more about the subject. The purpose of my blog this week is to discuss the phenomenon that is Skype.

According to Skype.com, it’s free software which works seamlessly with users’ current internet connection. People could chat away with free Skype-to-Skype calls and never worry about cost, time or distance. Skype can be used on a computer or on a person’s mobile phone (“Use Skype,” 2010). Just for starters people can instant message (IM) anyone on their contact list or even use group IM to chat with lots of people at the same time (“Use Skype,” 2010). Also, people could hold conference calls to organize a get-together and then find business recommendations to search for the perfect venue to hold it (“Use Skype,” 2010). The video features available on Skype enable people to make free video phone calls or even take pictures, as long as they have a webcam (“Use Skype,” 2010).

When Skype was founded six years ago, it was hailed as a way to change how people communicate with each other (Rosen, 2009). While the program, valued at 2.75 billion, is used regularly on TV shows like Who Wants to Be a Millionaire, most publishers and booksellers agree that VolP (voice over Internet protocol) program is no replacement for live author appearances (Rosen, 2009). Still, a way to connect writers and their fans for free without paying for plane tickets and hotels is particularly appealing to publishers (Rosen, 2009). As with anything, there are some disadvantages to using Skype. First, Skype’s video quality can be spotty, with dropped connections and irritating time lags (Rosen, 2009). Plus, security can be problematic. If preferences aren’t set to exclude communication with people not in the user’s address book, a session can be interrupted with unwanted images and comments (Rosen, 2009).

It is my belief that the use of Skype will only increase in the future. Yes, there are issues that need to be worked out, but financially it appears that Skype is working in the best interest of its users. Would, I try Skype? Maybe, but I am not going to rush out right-away to connect with family, friends or co-workers. Skype seems to be a technology that’s fun to try but that would be the extent for me. I prefer face-to-face interaction in everyday life, versus Facebook, Instant Messenger, and yes perhaps even Skype.

References

Rosen, J. (2009). To skype or not to skype?. Publishers Weekly, 256 (50), 22-23.

Use Skype (2010). Get Connected. Retrieved from http://www.skype.com/getconnected/.

Is The Scholar Be-ta Than Databases?

My last two blogs have, in some way, dealt with Google regarding the American Revolutionary, John Hanson. Today’s blog will deal with Google Scholar, along with traditional library databases. It was recommended by my professor that we as Library and Information Students know about Google Scholar. For the first time this year, I used it to obtain and print an article needed for my Research class. While I found Google Scholar very simple and quick to use, I didn’t know much about it. So that I might familiarize myself with Google Scholar I did a little research about this popular resource. What follows is what I learned about Google Scholar and its impact on traditional library databases.

Google Scholar is a beta product that was introduced to the world in November 2004 (Howland, Wright, Boughan, & Roberts, 2009). Upon first reading the words “beta product,” I had no clue what they meant and so I went to find out. Technically, a Beta device or application isn’t considered to be a mature product (“Wiki” “Answers,” 2010). A Beta device has been through internal company review and error testing, but it hasn’t been thoroughly tested by people outside of the developmental team (“Wiki” “Answers,” 2010). Now, having the meaning of “beta product,” I was able to further understand Google Scholar.

Next, in the article “How Scholarly is Google Scholar? A Comparison to Library Databases,” the researchers pose two questions. The first question they asked was if Google Scholar result sets were more or less scholarly than licensed library database result sets (Howland et al., 2009). The second question the study posed was does the scholarliness of Google Scholar vary across disciplines (Howland et al., 2009). What the researchers found was that Google Scholar is, on average, 17.6 percent more scholarly than materials found only in databases and that there is no statistically difference between the scholarliness of materials found in Google Scholar across disciplines (Howland et al., 2009).

Moreover, the key to Google Scholar’s success is relevancy ranking and a large universe of information (Howland et al., 2009). A database is limited to its defined title list of content, whereas Google Scholar, by its very nature, is open to a much broader set of content that aids the researcher (Howland et al., 2009). Up to this point, many library databases have defaulted to sorting by date rather than by relevancy (Howland et al., 2009). The fact that many databases are now adding relevancy search options seems to indicate that Google Scholar got it right in the first place (Howland et al., 2009). It appears that Google Scholar has done a better job of both precision and recall than library databases have (Howland et al., 2009).

Bottom line, the results from this study left me surprised and very impressed. Apparently, Google Scholar is going very strong and is here to stay. A part of me wishes that I had done “more thorough” research of this topic before I wrote my last two blogs. In my defense, however, Google was the resource up for debate and not Google Scholar. Despite the debate, Google Scholar appears to be a credible resource that will only continue to grow and improve.

References

Howland, J.L., Wright, T.C., Boughan, R.A., & Roberts, B.C. (2009). How scholarly is google scholar? A comparison to library databases. College Research Libraries, 70 (3), 227-234.

Answers.com (n.d.). Retrieved from WikiAnswers:
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_does_BETA_mean

Databases vs. Google (2)

Utilizing three of Wayne State’s general biographical resources and one online encyclopedia, enabled me to learn more about John Hanson. There is some debate over when Hanson was born as I learned from my search. One of the biographical resources I checked along with an article from Google indicated that Hanson was born in 1715. Due to two biographical resources indicating the birth year of 1721, along with an online encyclopedia, I went with 1721. All of the resources I used to learn more about Hanson did indicate that he died in 1783. The resources I used for this research were Who2?: Find Famous People Fast, Notable Citizens of Planet Earth, Biography Resource Center + Marquis Who’s Who, and the Encyclopedia Americana. As Stanis recommended, I did Google “first presidents” to find an article about Mr. John Hanson. What I learned from Wayne State’s general resources and Google will be further discussed.

First, the article found on Google does state that John Hanson was the first President of the United States of America (“John” “Hanson,” 1997). This article was the only material I found throughout my search to firmly make that argument. It also alleges that Washington was the first President of the U.S. under the constitution we follow today, but that seven others preceded him to that title. Of course, John Hanson was one of the seven people who allegedly preceded Washington to the highest seat in the land.

Next, the other 4 resources I used gave titles to John Hanson which continued to raise speculation in my mind. In fact, Who2?: Find Famous People Fast stated that Hanson was best known as “the guy who was sort-of the first American president” (Who2, 2010). Biography Resource Center, however, never mentioned that he was the first president of the United States. Instead, they mentioned that in November 1781, Hanson was elected president of the Congress of the Confederacy (Biography Resource, 2010).

Even more interesting, Notable Citizens of Planet Earth states that in 1781 Hanson was elected by the Continental Congress “President of the United States in Congress Assembled,” an office he held for one year (Biographical Dictionary, 2007). This resource did mention that he is sometimes referred to as “the first president of the United States,” but he was a congressional presiding officer and had none of the powers of the president under the constitution (Biographical Dictionary, 2007). So does this mean that he only had the title of President of the U.S.?

Also, the Encyclopedia Americana states that Hanson was the first president of Congress under the Articles of Confederation. As such, he is sometimes regarded as the first president of the United States (Americana, 2010). There is some support to his claim of presidency, on Nov. 30, 1781, Gen. George Washington congratulated Hanson on his elevation to “the most important seat in the United States” (Americana, 2010).

Surprisingly, Hanson’s race wasn’t mentioned much in the resources used for this research. Biography Resource Center did mention that he was of Swedish descent, but it never mentioned an African background. While researching Hanson, I quickly gave up the idea of looking for actual details of his race. Conducting searches on his race even with databases or other credible resources just seemed to be impossible.

Although, I won’t say rather or not John Hanson was the first president of the U.S., I will admit the information I found was convincing enough to believe that he could’ve been. As for rather or not he was of African American descent, who knows? Since I found no material claiming he was or was not, that is left up to the reader to decide.

Overall, my preference would have to be the resources I used through Wayne State. Google wasn’t bad, but it never hurts to double check your information through the use of credible library resources.

References

Filler, L. (2010). Hanson, John (1721–1783). Encyclopedia Americana. Retrieved February 19, 2010, from Grolier Online http://ea.grolier.com/article?id=0193210-00

"John Hanson."Dictionary of American Biography Base Set. American Council of Learned Societies, 1928-1936. Reproduced in Biography Resource Center. Farmington Hills, Mich.: Gale, 2010. http://galenet.galegroup.com/servlet/BioRC

John Hanson, First President. (1997). John Hanson, American Patriot and First President of the United States. Retrieved from http://www.marshallhall.org/hanson.html.

Notable Citizens of Planet Earth. (2007). S9 Biographical Dictionary. Retrieved from http://www.s9.com/Biography/Hanson-John.

Databases vs. Google (1)

Earlier this week I was reading an interview featuring Bern Nadette Stanis, on AOL’s Black Voices. During the 1970’s Stanis’ popularity was kicked into full gear on the black family sitcom, Good Times, where she played Thelma Evans. While I cannot say that I have followed her career over the years, I can say that I am a fan. When I saw that she had done an interview on Black Voices, I just had to read it and I’m glad that I did. In the article, Mrs. Stanis makes mention of John Hanson being not only a black man but the first president of the United States. Interesting, huh? John Hanson was an American Revolutionary leader who was the first president of Congress under the Articles of Confederation (Encyclopedia Americana, 2010).

Apparently, a historian brought this information to the attention of the actress and motivational speaker. Expressing her amazement, Stanis was excited to learn this and recommended that the readers Google “first presidents” to learn more about the subject manner. Now, some may wonder what this has to do with Library & Information Science. Working in an academic library, and advocating the use of databases weekly, makes me pro-library resources. Students approach the reference desk daily wanting to learn how to work WSU’s databases for class or research purposes. Google is not the first option I consider when students need articles for either purposes. The suggestion to use Google to learn more about John Hanson vexed me for a few reasons. First, we live in a day and time where most know nothing but Google, and they make it their first and last stop. Most teens or adults for that matter don’t think to question the search engine’s credibility. Next, to learn something from a historian and then suggest that others learn about the same subject or idea from Google is terrible. Perhaps I don’t know as much as I should, but when it comes to knowledge, aren’t historians walking books of it? Still, one would believe that a historian’s account of something is more credible than whatever Google’s search engine would produce.

Curiosity got the best of me and I did some research of my own to learn the “truth” about Mr. John Hanson. Finally, what will follow next week is what I discovered or didn’t discover in my quest for the “truth” about this figure.

Filler, L. (2010). Hanson, John (1721–1783). Encyclopedia Americana. Retrieved February 19, 2010, from Grolier Online http://ea.grolier.com/article?id=0193210-00