And the Oscar goes to . . . . .

. . . Google Maps!!!

Today's assignment was to select and explore any site/tool from the list of Web 2.0 winners and blog about it. I decided to learn more about Google Maps, the first place winner (in the category of "Mapping") in SEOmoz's Web 2.0 Awards.

Google Maps is AWESOME!!! I began by typing in my home address and sure enough, within seconds it not only came up with an overhead grid view of my street and the surrounding neighborhood, but also displayed a dialog box which showed a thumbnail of "my house." (Note: Google's picture was actually a couple houses off from my actual house. But still, that isn't bad when you consider what a monumental feat they've accomplished!)

Users are given the option of seeing a location's street view, the traffic conditions, street maps, satellite imagery, as well as the street maps combined with the terrain (a topographical map.) Street view is very cool, very addicting, and only slightly creepy (this could be a stalker's dream.) The satellite imagery looks like the views an individual would see were they to use Google Earth. The traffic conditions tab allows users to see what traffic conditions are like on particular roads at various times of the day. (Note to self - never drive southbound on I-15 in the Farmington area on Monday morning at 8:00 a.m. Traffic appears to be at a standstill.)

I tried the "get directions" feature and was very impressed. I love it!!! Prior to this I've used Map Quest (which is great too), but I think from now on I'm a Google Maps man. As with Map Quest it gives the user a map as well as detailed directions. It shows the total distance as well as approximate travel time. There's an option which allows the user to avoid highways (it will map out an alternate route using only side streets.) The user can drag the cursor over the map and actually customize/change their route. Google Maps also allows the user to send the directions via email, get reverse directions, and most importantly, print the directions. The printed page includes the detailed directions, map overview, start and end maps, as well as the start and end address, and the total distance and travel time.

This is an extremely useful tool. It will benefit me both in a professional setting as well as in my personal life. Thank you so much Google. And well done! Well done.

"It's Alive!!!" at Google Labs

Well, the good folks over at Google never cease to amaze me. I just got through browsing some of their latest "creations" over at the labs, and it's pretty cool to see what they're coming up with. Here's a quick review of a few of the features I explored:

Google Sets:

I'm not sure how useful it is (although, come to think of it, I guess the point is to sort of imitate the "cluster" concept found on other sites such as Clusty and Mooter) but it was definitely fun seeing whether or not it could predict and/or find relationships for the items I entered in. For example, I typed in "Keira Knightley," "Johnny Depp," and "Orlando Bloom" and Google came up with a list of other actors from "Pirates of the Caribbean" and various other films. I typed "Big Bird," "Cookie Monster," and "Grover" and Google came up with Bert, Ernie, and the rest of the Sesame Street gang. Trying to be clever I typed in "Donald Trump," "grilled cheese," and "Survivor" but unfortunately Google couldn't find any direct correlation. Isn't it obvious? Oh well, nobody's perfect.

Google Suggest:

This is a great feature, and to be honest, I don't understand why they aren't using it yet. Yahoo already does this sort of thing on their site. It seems pretty handy in case you're not really sure of the spelling, or maybe you want to see related topics, or maybe you're just looking for a quick time-saver. Also, it seems to me that the suggestions are shown in order of popularity, so in a way it already fills the role of Google Trends.

Google Trends:

I thought it was interesting but I didn't really see the point. When I visited this site I noticed that Star Jones' popularity had recently spiked (due to her recent divorce announcement.) Isn't it sad that that's what it takes in order to get noticed these days! How do the folks at Google decide which "hot trends" to post anyway?

Google Extensions for Firefox:

This had several cool applications. Namely, "Google Browser Sync" (synchronize your browser settings across computers, restore tabs and windows from your previous session) and "Google Send to Phone" (send text messages of web page content to your mobile phone.) I was wondering if Google Browser Sync might allow an individual to access their favorites from any computer. If so, there goes the necessity for sites like Del.icio.us (which in all honesty is fine by me.)

Google Mars:

I'm already a HUGE fan of Google Earth (WARNING: THIS PROGRAM IS HIGHLY ADDICTIVE!!!) so by all means, why not throw in another planet? It looks like for now they've only got a portion of Mars displayed which they're then repeating over and over . . . but I'm sure this will increase in time.

It looks like Google has some pretty neat stuff in the works. It's exciting to see what's out there as well as what's waiting just around the corner. Now if only Google could come up with some sort of fool-proof dating service. I can see it now - "Google Dating . . . where you're guaranteed to find your perfect match every time." Hey, a guy can dream can't he?

Online Application Tools . . .

. . . or, How Google Continues to Impress Me

Today's assignment required that I experiment with a few online application tools. I didn't have any luck with Zoho simply because I lacked a username and password. NumSum wouldn't come up at all. However, I found several applications on Google Docs that I liked quite a bit (and could actually see myself using.) Well for starters, Google Docs (which I'm currently using to type this post.) It seems like a decent word processing program and appears to include all the basics. I really like the fact that I can access this program from any computer, as long as it has internet access. Not needing a flash drive/floppy disk is kind of cool. I also like the Google Calender feature. Up to this point in my life I haven't been very good at planning things on calendars (taking the time to write things down takes TOO MUCH effort! ;) I've tried to keep track of important dates in my head) and it's worked so far, but it seems like I'm having to keep track of more and more stuff so it might be a good thing to train myself to start using a calendar. I guess it's either between using an online application like this or writing information down in my day planner (which has been collecting dust for the past few years.) I guess the only limitation with Google Calendars is that I need to be near a computer in order to access it, whereas my day planner or some other pocket calendar could be carried around with me all the time. I also looked at the Google spreadsheets but haven't yet had too much of a need for spreadsheets. I'm sure in the future this might also come in handy. Basically, the main point I've gleaned from today's exercise is how ridiculously versatile and user-friendly Google is and how much I wish I had bought shares when it went public. Doh!

Searching for the Best Search Engine

Honestly I'd like today's post to consist of these few salient sentences:

GOOGLE IS THE BEST SEARCH ENGINE AND THE ONLY ONE I WANT TO USE. END OF STORY. PERIOD.

Unfortunately, that doesn't really fulfill the assignment. So, using the terms "shadow" and "puppets" I tried several search engines from the list and here's what I found.

Yahoo -

I've used Yahoo before and like the format. It's very similar to Google. It's clean looking, makes sense (but maybe that's just because I'm already familiar with it), and allows the user to search in other categories such as "web, images, video, local, and shopping" (again similar to Google.) I came up with a total of 9,890,000 results, ranging everywhere from YouTube shadow puppet show clips to the Wikipedia page on shadow puppetry, to various puppetry how-to pages. One nice feature Yahoo offers is the "Also try" option where it suggests other possible searches. All in all though I would still rather stick with Google but I do like using Yahoo to read their top news, entertainment, and sports stories.

Clusty -

Right off I noticed the search cluster bar on the left-hand side of the screen. I assume this is meant to help users find more relevant search results. The major portion of the screen resembles Google or Yahoo. As with the other two search engines, Clusty allows the user to also search web, news, images, wikipedia, blogs, and jobs. I thought the wikipedia and blog options were interesting. Clusty brought up 1,022,520 results.

Gravee -

I couldn't even get this page to come up, so that's a big "NO" for Gravee.

Wink -

I pulled up this page and immediately saw the heading, "Where people find people." Hmm, I'm sure this would be useful for some searches but it isn't relevant for mine, unless of course "Shadow Puppets" is the name of a person. Hmmmm . . .

Mooter -

Mooter boasts the slogan, "The Power of Relevance." I have to admit though, outside of the cool sounding name I didn't find this site to be very useful. In all fairness this probably is because I'm not familiar with the layout, but here's what I found. I typed in "shadow puppets" and was immediately taken to a "cluster" (it reminded me of one of those brainstorming webs that we had to do in high school English class.) The web contained several headings such as "uncle orson writing class, puppets, shadow, theatre, series, puppet, and book." In the center was the label, "All Results." "All Results" basically brings up a similar search page as Google, Yahoo, and Clusty, as does another button labeled "I want it ALL!" I spent only a couple minutes here but wasn't that impressed. It's nice that they're trying to pull the most relevant websites out, but even then it's kind of confusing. I mean, do I want to click on the "shadow" tab or the "puppet" tag? Or maybe the "puppets" tab? By the way, what's the difference between "puppet" and "puppets" anyway? Also, every time I clicked on a tab, looked at the results, and then tried to return to the original screen, a message box would pop up saying, "The page you are trying to view contains POSTDATA that has expired from cache . . . blah blah blah . . ." This got old really quickly.

So, it was nice having the chance to explore other search engines but I'm still a Google fan through and through. And since today's post dealt with the "wonderful world" of shadow puppets, here's a relevant clip. Enjoy!

What Library 2.0 means to me . . .

Hi there, so this week's assignment involved reading several articles discussing web 2.0, library 2.0, and the like, and then blogging about my opinion and reaction. I'll come right out and say it - I found some of the articles to be much more readable and user-friendly than I did others. A couple authors, Chip Nilges and John J. Riemer, went completely over my head, reminding me once again of the simpleton that I am when it comes to technology. I felt indifference towards Michael Stephens' article, but would like to respond to a couple items discussed by Rick Anderson (Away from the "icebergs") and Dr. Wendy Schultz (To a temporary place in time . . .)

One thought that struck me as I was reading was that, as a library, we are serving a very broad scope of patrons when it comes to technical savvy. Sure there are a growing number of folks that pride themselves on being up-to-date and current on the latest technological innovations, but there are still others, many, many others who are clinging to the tried and true traditions of the past. Rick Anderson made the statement that it's important that we be "placing library services and content in the user's preferred environment (i.e., the Web)." True, for many people the internet is now the preferred environment through which to obtain services and information. However, there is still that part of our population that relishes the institutions and traditions of yesterday and refuses to give them up. They love the touch, feel, smell, and experience of reading from a book. They enjoy browsing crowded collections as opposed to sitting down at a computer. I'm not saying one way is better than the other. What I am saying is that in an ideal world, it would be nice to figure out a way to accommodate both groups. That we figure out a way to serve those individuals that enjoy existing in the technological realm, while at the same time not forgetting those folks that refuse to surrender the practices and routines that they have grown up on and with which they have become so comfortable.

In order for Library 2.0 to be successful it requires that there be a system-wide acceptance of the internet as well as other new technologies. By "system-wide" I'm referring to the need of schools and other organizations outside of the library to begin making similar evolutions. I speak as a children's librarian here. Rick Anderson talked about the necessity of doing away with the "just in case collection" (a collection of materials which are rarely used but which libraries continue to hang onto just in case a patron comes in looking for them.) I'm all for doing away with those parts of the collection that are no longer being used, but then again, teachers need to allow for adjustments when assigning students reports. I often serve students whose assignment requires that they obtain their information from a book, RATHER THAN THE INTERNET. Most things these days can be found on the net, and it's often much easier to find it there (ever heard of a little thing called Google?), but until teachers more readily embrace the tools on the net, that "just in case collection" continues to be an important part of the collection that I can't justify discarding.

In regards to Dr. Wendy Schultz, let me just say, Wow! She's got some pretty grandiose ideas for the future! Library 3.0: the 3D experience? Sounds like a pretty exciting IMAX movie! Whoa, how about that one - Library IMAX? I mean, in Library 3.0 we'll already have librarian avatars and all that so why can't we take it a step further and experience libraries the IMAX way. You know, with really big letters. =D But seriously, as my friend Patrick pointed out in his blog, "How we go from underfunded inner-city urban libraries to exquisite brandy, aromatic cigars and the smell of leather is beyond me, the librarians of the future must be better fundraisers than the librarians of today."

Schultz referred to a service called SecondLife - where there are "subscribers who spend more than forty hours a week online, immersed in its virtual graphic world." More than FORTY HOURS A WEEK?!?! What the heck is wrong with us? Are our lives that boring that we now have to live vicariously through made up second lives? Did I miss something? What's next? People whose SecondLives have become so mundane that within the SecondLife World a new virtual world is created known as ThirdLife? I can see it now - "ThirdLife: for those of us whose first two lives just don't cut it." People, get a life! A first life!!!

There has been considerable discussion regarding libraries and how dramatically different they'll be in the next ten to fifteen years . . . with some even worrying that our jobs are in jeopardy and that libraries will become obsolete. Schultz stated, "Libraries are not just collections of documents and books, they are conversations, they are convocations of people, ideas, and artifacts in dynamic exchange. Libraries are not merely in communities, they are communities: they preserve and promote community memories; they provide mentors not only for the exploration of stored memory, but also for the creation of new artifacts of memory." LIBRARIES ARE NOT MERELY IN COMMUNITIES, THEY ARE COMMUNITIES. Certainly that is the mission of the City Library. Our former director saw the library not only as a building meant to house a collection of materials, but also to serve as an important community gathering place, where ideas and services can be shared. Looking around I see so many people in the library who are not sitting at the computers but are instead browsing the book shelves, talking to friends, attending a storytime or some other program, working on homework, utilizing our public spaces such as the "Crystal Cave" and the "Attic Room", or simply enjoying the view. Maybe I'm short-sighted but I don't see computers and/or Library 2.0 completely filling that niche just yet. And to be honest, I don't think I want to see that happen either. Library 4.0? No thanks.

Look out World!

create your own visited country map
or check our Venice travel guide

I really get out there. Really.

create your own personalized map of the USA
or check out ourCalifornia travel guide

Online Image Generators, or, Paul's Family Album

Play Week? Yeah, that was an understatement. I had so much fun playing around with the online image generators . . . . a little too much fun in fact. Once again I have found another highly-addicting computer-related past-time, just waiting to suck away even more of my time. Strangely enough, this week's activities had a very genealogical feel to them. I started out by looking at the various sample generators, but soon discovered that they contained personal family information. For example, I unearthed the ancient Roman origin of my name, Paul. Here it is. And trust me, there was absolutely no "tomfoolery" involved. This is completely legit. (Thank you "CoolText." Shhh.)



Also, through the magic of computers (thanks "Funny Face Generator") I came across several old family photos. Specifically, pictures of my older brothers. All EIGHT of them. The resemblance is uncanny. Unfortunately, as you'll see, I was sort of the "ugly duckling" in the family. Oh well, can't win 'em all.

I don't necessarily see too much of a practical application for some of these programs, but then again, as a children's librarian I've learned that one should never say never. There COULD come a day when I need to make use of a "Ninja Text Generator." One can never be too sure . . . .