The Cloud's Silver Lining

Without going into detail, I recently had to replace my laptop and decided that this was about the time to make the jump to a Netbook (specifically an Acer Aspire One 8GB SSD with Linux - yep, just before the new 10" model comes out).

Now I've lost laptops to various catastrophes in the past and every time has been an extremely stressful experience. This outing, however, was different - for about a year I've been regularly backing up (using rsync) all my files to a home server and storing my photos, music, etc on that.

So, I was confident that most of my data was safe but what really surprised me was how simple it was to return back to a full working setup because of the way I've gradually shifted to the cloud. In the past getting Outlook (with it's Calendar, Email and Contacts) working has been a significant part of the hassle. Using Gmail and other services meant that once I'd set up the web and opened Firefox I was 90% of the way back to normality.

Switching away from Windows was straight forward as well (I already dual-booted Ubuntu and XP but used Windows more often than not) but with Firefox installed, once I'd got Skype and Pidgin on board there was little left to do.

This whole episode has illustrated to me just how different a working environment the cloud is and underlines how the PC is becoming a host for the browser (and therefore the web). By far the most annoying aspect of having to move to a new machine was the loss of all the Chrome saved passwords (and, of course, Chrome itself which hasn't yet made it to Linux properly).

The Potential of Latitude

In case you're not aware, Google have launched a new product - Latitude - which falls firmly into the 'building block' category of services. The core product lets you share you location (updated manually or via a google maps application) with select Google contacts.

An interesting feature of the Google Maps application is that it will stay resident on your device, updating your location in real time. Scary stalking and surveillance opportunities aside, the general idea is that you can see which of your contacts are near to you now.

I mentioned in my 10 predictions for 2009 that I think location will be important this year and Latitude is a good indicator that net access on the move will be a key area for service development. The current application doesn't really catch the imagination but the combination with Twitter-like services (and, of course, a level of ambiguity about where exactly you are) provides some really interesting possibilities.

One thing that really struck me when playing with Latitude is the huge impact automatic updating makes - suddenly the service goes from a point of interest to a useful way of seeing who's actually nearby right now.

Leading on from this, I realised the impact that having Latitude on might have on your mobile phone bill - and how important unlimited (or virtually unlimited) data plans will be for these kind of services. At the moment networks charge astronomic amounts for very low levels of data use (Orange charges me from £4 for 4MB up to £88.13(!) for a gigabyte).

Ubiquitous computing requires not only a high level of connectivity (through whatever available means) but also a low enough cost threshold for entry. The iPhone's £30/month for 'unlimited' data is a pretty good start but, until most plans provide this kind of feature, services like Latitude will never reach their full potential.

And of course, as soon as a proper Mobile Broadband service that can compete with ADSL (at least for those for whom web surfing is the key usage) is available then we may well see the death of the traditional Home phone line...

Facebook Breaks the Social Media Social Contract

It seems that Facebook's attempt to revise it's T&Cs has resulted in a rapid backtrack. Admitedly, Zuckerberg and his team seem to have handled this well - going straight back to the community to discuss issues rather than sticking with the "Well, it's our site" line. In the past - particularly with the redesign issue - the community's voice went unheard but with this particular issue Facebook has promised to listen to everyone.

It's interesting to draw contrasts between this situation and the OCLC response - essentially both revolve around rights issues but in the case of OCLC there's money - and a client/provider relationship - involved and that's not true of Facebook. The money in Facebook comes through advertising and not (directly) from the user.

Facebook - like many similar Web 2.0 services - is 'free'. Free software evangelists talk about "Free as in speech, not as in beer" and Facebook (and the ilk) are closer to the free beer than free speech. Although, of course, free access doesn't mean that there's no cost to users in terms of attention.

In addition, Facebook has something more complex; an implied relationship which is directly contradicted by Terms and Conditions - a kind of Social Contract for Social Media. Only when there's an attempt to enforce, change or highlight the 'actual' rules does this implicit set of responsibilities come out.

For better or worse, people have extended the Google mantra of 'Don't be evil' to other web companies. Rights grabbing and restrictions are expected of 'old' leviathans like Microsoft and (to some extent) Apple - often far more than they actually deserve.

Google may own pretty much everything we do in their part of the cloud but how many people really expect them to do anything about it? And what would the reaction to a (truly) evil act be?

How I learned to stop worrying and love the sidebar...

A few days ago I decided to go back to trying Twitter after ditching it when they dropped SMS updates. Prior to this Twitter was useful to me as a kind of passive group messaging service among friends - a way to give presence information out into the ether and see what came back.

I did try and keep using it post-SMS but it never really had the same attraction, and I watched from the sidelines as it became more and more popular with net and non-net 'celebs'. My decision to give it another go has been hard thought, I've seen several blogs turn down hill as well-thought out posts give out to a stream of consciousness series of tweeted links and "on the train" type comments. 

So why go back? Well I have gradually begun to understand that that 'passive group messaging' function is still just as useful in a work environment. With Twitter, it's not necessarily about conversation (although it can be) and more about the quick and easy posting of thoughts and statuses. Ok, some are totally useless for some followers but they're aimed at others and they are - most importantly - easy to ignore.

One of the reasons I hear for people using Twitter (or Jaiku or Yammer or one of the other similar services) is that it forgoes the question 'what do you do?'. I tend to meet a fair number of people who work in ways which are non-traditional, who scowl when people say "You work in a Library? You must read lots of books!". For those of us who cross boundaries (and for the few who enter entirely new frontiers) job descriptions become quickly irrelevant.

Of HTML and Meta Headers...

Anyway, how does this relate to the sidebar? Well as well as pretty much writing off Twitter I'd also written off the role of the Sidebar in Firefox - what's the point? I thought, it's just chopping the side off your browser for bookmarks or history (two things which generally deserve to be hidden).

That was, until, I started using Twitter again. After a brief purging of my old tweets I set about looking for a good desktop app (I settled on Twhirl in the end) and started following a few notable people I've met along the way. Great stuff, I thought, as I watched the tweets (about #uksnow, mostly) roll in.

Then I went into work. Ah, well - with some things you can cope with having a service in another window but after a few hours of ALT+SHIFT+TABing to check on Twitter I was getting fed up. After a bit of surfind around I eventually found this post which described how to get twitter in your sidebar.

So, now I have an effective use for that stupid slice on the left of my browser and Twitter's low maintenance mobile solution can sit there and only catch my eye when it changes. One thing I noticed was that the mobile interface doesn't refresh - good on a costly mobile connection, but not for me. The solution was a short html file stored on my local machine and bookmarked in the browser:


<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="refresh" content="120" />
</head>
<frameset cols="0,*">
<frame src="#">
<frame src="http://m.twitter.com" name="showframe">
</frameset>
</html>


A brief bit of dodgy HTML and I now had a pretty effective Twitter interface with zero installation requirement. It's amazing what you can find on the web...

Coping with RSS Overload

Just when I think I've got my email all sorted it suddenly becomes apparent that my Google Reader has over 200 'Starred' items. My pattern for reading blogs through RSS (and, realistically, I hardly ever read anything any other way if I can help it) involves scanning the description and 'filing' the post for a proper read if it's a) too long to read now and b) interesting.

Train journey's are a perfect time to catch up but, unfortunately, too many blogs only give some of the post via RSS - which means that I end up having to go online to read them anyway. This is my third most disliked blog-habit* and makes me pine for a lovely netbook with built in 3G

Organising Feeds

There are some feeds which I always just scan through, some which occasionally need further reading and others which nearly always end up Starred. Most of the time, the Starred posts are work-related and are an analysis of something I follow up on - or post on myself.

So, once in a while I tend to plough through the Starred file to try and get to 'RSS-Zero', I normally do this by 'sifting' the posts several times. 

The first sift is for fun stuff, or passive things (YouTube videos often end up here as I tend to be a reader rather than a viewer). 

The second sift is to sort out themes within the posts - I've already scanned all the posts during the first sift so I can no go through and pick out all the posts about (say) happenings related to LibraryThing/Bowker. These can then be treated as a whole (I tend to try and tease my way back to the 'original' element and then scan the posts after for the analysis elements) and read or possibly even turned into a blog post.

The third sift identifies all the remaining posts which need a good solid read - these are usually going to inform me directly (lifehacker posts tend to end up on the Starred list from time to time) and I tend to pick a few of these posts to add to a 'Useful Links' post which are useful to go back to in the future.

The problem is I always end up with a few 'posts' which have piqued my interest but can't be dealt with there and then. A good example of this is this post by Lorcan Dempsey about the publication of the proceedings of the first M-Libraries conference.

The post interests me for 2 reasons: Firstly, I'm interested that there's a second conference in June this year (not that I'll be able to wangle my way to Vancouver, mind) - that's easy, I just fire an event into my calendar prefixed "Watch:" and then I can forget about it until June.

I'm also interested in reading the proceedings of the first conference, so I check my Library's catalogue and.... oh, it's not there yet. So I leave it starred and check again next time I go on an RSS blitz.

But...

This is OK for one post but I'm now down to such a level that I have 30 or 40 posts at any one time 'sitting' waiting for the world to change in some way before I do something about them. Eventually, I know, I'll declare RSS-bankruptcy and just ditch them. It's sad but it's true.

* First is having feeds which only contain the title, which is a surefire 'unsubscribe' for me and second is making links which look like they're going somewhere link to a blog's previous posts on that subject (you know who I mean, Engadget).

2009 Predictions

So, January - if any month was a goldmine for bloggers it's January. Firstly, it's just been Christmas so all those odd gadgets are ready and waiting for your community review and secondly it gives everyone an opportunity to try and guess what the New Year will bring.

And why not? Here's my top 10 trends for 2009:

1. Mobile Web - it's not just about the iPhone, 2009 will be the year that sorts the wheat from the chaff in terms of mobile websites and applications. Those who should be offering services to the small screens will be starting to panic by December if they don't have a top class interface. After all, mobile is the new black.

2. Always On -in many ways this is an extension of the Mobile Web but WiFi (free, no warranty and unsecured) will continue to expand and the gaps will be filled by 3G and other technologies. 

3. Location Sensitivity - Mozilla Geode, GPS in phones, and all kinds of geo-mashing means that by the end of 2009 we'll be starting to expect that web applications know where we are when we use them. This will lead to all kinds of cool Library applications.

4. Reality Will Be (even more) Augmented - the first three predictions will start to work together to provide more augmented experiences. Who hasn't seen someone walking down the street, with google maps on their iPhone? The next step will be continually updated information which can be used to 'enhance' your experience of the real world with all kinds of metadata - imagine google earth but in the real world.

5. The Google OS Comes of Age - more people will ditch e for g, google docs, gmail, calendar and other cloud apps will become far more prevalent and people's first reaction will be to go online. Windows 7 might even boot straight to IE...

6. IPv6 - There'll be an increasing push on moving to IPv6 in order to cater for all those cars, phones, watches and spoons which will need IP addresses.

7. Chrome will Catch Up with Firefox - Well, maybe not by the end of 2009 but Google will package Chrome in as many ways as possible and this will eat into the 'anything but IE' market. IE 8 will probably win some floating browsers back and will, of course, have the core 'bundled with Windows' market. It's not unthinkable that we'll enter into a second browser wars with Google and Microsoft head to head in 2010.

8. Fibre Becomes Political - Obama's already stated that building a new communications infrastructure is a key part of his technology agenda and Gordon Brown's jumped on the bandwagon. Whether this is modern day boondoggling or not we'll end up with a better spread of high bandwidth access in the end. 2009 will probably be more about preparing, posturing and fears of a new digital divide.

9. Twitter Jumps the Shark - Are there any celebs who aren't tweeting (or at least having their assistant tweet for them?). People will start to see that Twitter is mostly divided between 'broadcasting' A-listers and banal "@jon - had beans for tea" individuals - all the effective use in the middle will shift to business or social-network based presence services. 

10. Better Language Processing - Ok, maybe this won't come in 2009 but it's just on the horizon. It would be fantastic to think that the semantic web could be fueled by well formatted, and easily accessible, XML data but there's going to need to be something that bridges the gap and can identify and attribute triples from the language of text. We might see increasing use of simple approaches in 2009 (identifying phone numbers, places, postal codes, etc) at least.

Here's some other 2009 lists for those who are interested: Robin Hamman, Trendspotting, Tame the Web, Pew, Horizon Report - A & NZ and various LITA people.

Link Round Up

Yet more great stories you might have missed.

• It turns out that 73.4% of Wikipedia is written by 2% of the users and people are claiming that this undermines its authenticity - all the more reason to be an editor. In related news, did you know 90% of books are written by 1% of people who can read?
• If your OCD has reached new heights why not write an annual report about your life?
• LibraryThing sells it's soul signs up with the Cambridge Information Group and then coughs quietly hoping people will go back to thinking about OCLC.
• NetLibrary are offering Sony Reader compatible eBooks - which is great for me!
• Google have a cool new crowdsourcing service which allows you to apply user responses to improve your site. 
  
• Brian Kelly goes back to basics and defines "web site" (triggering off a terminology discussion in the comments).

• Oh yeah, and the rest of the UK started to take note of the OCLC situation once it made it into the broadsheets (just after they'd postponed and suggested a rethink). UPDATE: The Grauniad has issued some corrections on the original article).

What to do With Accessibility?

Anyone who hasn't been on Mars will know that the W3C has just released version 2.0 of their Web Content Accessibility Guidelines. In due course these will become a British Standard (BS 8878) (draft here - which apparently goes past it's sell by date on the 31st...).

One simple thing that's worth stating is that the speed of the web and the speed of any committee are so far apart we can all be pretty confident that the new guidelines will be out of date in some capacity as soon as they were confirmed. W3C have had a fair amount of trouble trying to strike the balance between practical and content-agnostic, I'll leave it to you to decide how well they did.

If you want a solid overview, there' a great video introduction by Paul Boag here. My suggestion is that you go watch that, or if you're brave/underworked go read the full spec here. It's ok, I'll wait...

Great, - who knew that WCAG is pronounced 'whuk-ag' eh! 

There's a few interesting points which have real relevance to anyone wanting to provide Web 2.0-y services - and a few questions that popped up in my mind.

Principles vs Practice

Here's an issue I have with accessibility guidelines: they start off with a straightforward and fair principle (such as "Everyone should have easy access to web resources") and then try and draw up rules or approaches which instruct you in how to meet that principle. The problem is that, in reality, the idea of 'universal access' is so wide that it's impossible to pin down - running the gamut from sensory disabilities (blindness, deafness) through to varying levels of literacy problems. 

At the end of this attempt to tie down such a wide topic to a list of 'dos' and 'do nots' you're then forced to go back and correct the principle in order to make it fit the inherent flaws in the practice (WCAG2.0's is  to"...make Web content more accessible to people with disabilities" - note the more). Wouldn't it just be better to trust organisations to meet the original principle, and to explain how they do (and are striving to) individually?

Ok, ok, if we let everyone choose how they want to meet the principle of "accessibility" then there will probably be a huge proportion of people who just ignore it... oh wait, doesn't that happen now?

Content vs Technology

One of the best aspects of WCAG2.0 in comparison to version 1 is that it's much more content focussed. Version 1 was, lets face it, written with the idea that the W3C is the guardian of the Internet - only W3C technologies are supposed to be used and the assumption is that they would be able to to keep up with the Web (ah, didn't we all think that last Millennium?).

So, WCAG2.0 accepts that - yes - the technologies will change and allows you to take advantage of that whilst still retaining some level of accessibility (by allowing you to rate content individually rather than as a single blob of web content). So the language and terms you use are as (if not more) important than the mere technology which provides them. 

What this means, in practice, is that everyone who writes for the Web needs to be thinking about accessibility issues from the second they put fingers to keyboard (no, this isn't the case at the moment for most organisations - think about all those people who write in Word and email it to someone to copy/paste into your CMS...). Do your content writers have guidelines?

People vs Programs

One aspect of WCAG(1 & 2), which is iterated more clearly in BS 8878, is the idea that real accessibility is best achieved by testing sites with users who have varying levels of disability. In my view, there's no other option - sure I can use a screen reader and fire up a contrast testing program but I'm not really judging the entire process from my own experience - as a disabled person would.

I'd go further to say that rather than seeking out specific groups who offer 'testing services' we should really be seeking out people who use our sites - what better evaluation can you get than from your own users who will give feedback on the context of the feature or content you're testing and not just the specific 'tick list' that most consultants provide.

Controled vs Cloud

Here's a question which every organisation is going to face in the next few years - where do our responsibilities in regard to accessibility end? It's no longer the case that we keep to our own web domains, store our servers two floors down and have total control over every piece of our web estate.

Even if we take every step to keep our hosted sites AAA compliant what level of responsibility do we have over our spaces on Flickr or Facebook? For these sites it's the market that drives their need to cater for various access needs - and we cannot guarantee that they will always cater for the kinds of requirements WCAG or British Standards require.

Cost vs Benefit

Now here is a tough one. What kind of steps should we take to make our web content accessible? How do we, pragmatically, ensure that we fulfil our legal and moral obligations whilst, at the same time, not falling foul of 'designing for the minority'.

How simple (technologically and linguistically) should we make the web? More importantly, if we choose not to sacrifice some aspects of our approach how do we explain this to users?

BS 8878 (in draft) says:

"Any user claiming conformance to this British Standard is expected to be able to justify any course of action that deviates from its recommendations."

but what form of justification isn't made clear. WCAG suggests that we:

• Consider using a combination of technologies to achieve your goals.

• If a technology meets some but not all of your criteria, consider providing an alternative solution, which provides disabled people with access to the same content, updated at the same time as the original content.

• If a technology meets none or only a few of your criteria, and an alternative, accessible method of providing that content is not reasonable or possible, ensure you let your disabled users know why this is the case.

In many cases we might seek to make content available to a wider audience by putting it on the web. Take video or streaming of talks and training sessions for example.

An event which might have been 'accessible' only to 20 or 30 participants who can physically make it to a room can be streamed or, better yet, recorded and posted online for very little cost. At this point the content is obviously more accessible than it was because it can be accessed by more people.

On top of that, the content is no less accessible than it was when the physical event took place (it's still lacking audio description or textual transcription). Adding transcriptions or other accessible assitive content can often cost far more than the original event.

The alternative for many is just to not put such content online - is that really the best solution? Is universal equality through universal poverty of access really acceptable?

Perhaps another alternative exists, Paul Boag's video has a community created transcript. If we provide the means for crowdsourced additional information perhaps we can, then, bridge the gap between wholly inaccessible (ie offline) and partially-accessible (non-WCAG compliant) content?

A Final Note

Often the reaction to the potential legal ramifications of the Disability Dissemination Act (and thus WCAG and BS guidelines) is disproportionate concern. Meeting the key principles of access, and justifying your approach, will probably negate the worries of most users - and the most important thing (far more important than meeting the specifics of W3C and BSI documents) is that we listen to users when they talk to us about our websites.

Accessibility guidelines can also tend to be manipulated, or oversold, by companies eagre to sell their accessibility services and by web designers who would rather not have the hassle of learning a new technology or improving their own skills.

PS: Brian Kelly (all round UKOLN web guru) has some great posts on accessibility over a fairly long period - his ideas about Accessibility 3.0 are interesting, he seems to be erring more toward the principles approach - and the application of API-type approaches to solve access issues. His other posts (1, 2, 3, 4) are all very interesting too - particularly the last post on Adaptability.

Back at the Keyboard

At the start of December I moved to a new role, on temporary secondment, within my work where I'm putting my research and web experience to good work. Since then time has seemed to be compressed as I've settled into the new role and been jumping from having my head buried in stats to holding focus groups.

It's all been very exciting and, I'm afraid, this blog has fallen a bit by the wayside. The new job carries with it it's own blog (well... sort of) but that doesn't mean I'll be giving up on this blog but it has helped me to redefine what will go where. 

I'm not sure if they will both live in tandem for ever and ever (I think that depends a lot on the types of content which end up on the Work blog) but for now they're two separate entities.

Anyway, if anyone thought I'd either given up or fallen off the planet then apologies but normal service has been resumed.

[PS: I very nearly considered leaving this post 'till February 2nd just to make it 2 months without any updates!]

How easy is your catalogue to search?

One of the eternal questions, and worries, for Libraries is the user-friendliness of their search mechanism. For most of us that means the OPAC provided by our library system vendor and traditionally Libraries have been prone to simple 'out-of-the-box' implementations or (perhaps even worse...) turning 'on' all of the catalogue's added-value features.

Recently, however, there have been more attempts to provide a coherent - and contextual - approach to the OPAC. Let's face facts: No one reads help pages or FAQs. It's true - check your own web logs. So how do you help your users to get the most out of their search (and most importantly, not just walk away)? Here's some ideas.

Little and Often 

Ok - so the big chunks of help don't work but there's nothing wrong with a nudge in the right direction. Check out any popular website and you'll see succinct clues to how and why results appear as they do. The best trick I've found is to try and write a short sentence to explain a function and then cut it down to half the time. 

Reuse! Reuse! Reuse!

Take a look at the University of Huddersfield Catalogue (the work of Dave Pattern) - data's been pulled from search and usage logs to create neat little features like the Tag Cloud on the front page and the Amazon-style 'other people also searched with' feature on the results page.

Don't Fight Google

It's done. People expect your search box to work like Google. In fact, not just like Google but better than Google. We can moan about the 'dumbing down' of researchers but as soon as people see that empty white box they expect to stick a string of (misspelled) keywords into it and get a result they like within the first page of hits. The sooner we learn to work within these parameters, and not fight them, the sooner we can build better mechanisms for search. And don't even think about making the default search anything except keyword.

Know Your Data (& Fix Your Indexing)

In any kind of searching consistency is everything so we all need a firm grip on our data. A beautifully constructed catalogue record is one thing but if your search parameters and indexing are so complicated that complex combinations are required to achieve useful search results perhaps it's time to reflect on the value of that data. A few coherent indexes with consistent data will always beat a hundred 'correct' ones.

Accept the Complexity 

Sometimes, however the gap between user expectations and the data is just too vast. Say, for example, that you're predominantly a science library but you've also got a small audio collection - how do you provide a straightforward service to your 90% of science users but also support the 10% of audiophiles? Sometimes it comes down to accepting that you're going to hit issues and making innovative use of zero results pages, 404s, "Email a Librarian" functions and hey - maybe even a live 'search help' facility.

A fair number of libraries are starting to look faceted and other 'innovative search solutions' (Primo, Aquabrowser, VUFind, and so on) to try and give a kick start to their user experience. These products are great but we still have to remember to be clear in our approach to tailoring that user experience.

The final approach is to embrace the major search engines and to focus on exposing your catalogue and Search Engine Optimisation. I have to admit to having some sympathy for this approach - rather than trying to constantly improve your own search it should be possible to just have a first class landing page and leave the rest of the work to Google, Yahoo! and the next great search engine through a site-search. Of course, this all depends on how open your catalogue is to indexing - or how up you are on XML site maps.

Mashed Libraries

I'm off in London today to attend the Mashed Libraries event at Birkbeck college. It looks 
like a great opportunity to explore some of the approaches and, for me, I'm hoping to get a 
grip on how others are approaching their own resources/data sources.

There seems to be a hefty practical element, it'll be interesting to see how that goes for 
those of us who are perhaps (ahem...) not code-minded! I've been given the opportunity to 
outline what we're doing at our library and - I hope - get feedback on the approach. Hopefully 
I'll be able to return home jam packed with ideas for how our library can do some really 
innovative things with our sources and resources.

Understanding the Value of an Information Qualification

Meredith Farkas [via Andrew Eynon's Library Blog] has posted the results of a brief survey into how prepared people felt by their academic Library School courses (and her own analysis). The results make for interesting reading - and it's interesting to see the sheer number of times that a lack of technical skills preparation appears. In many ways the information community places an almost iconic focus on the ideal of the (academically qualified) 'professional' but it's clear from even this small survey that there is a gap between the theory and practice.

Although I agree that there's always a need to keep these kinds of courses current and relevant I'm not sure that equating the idea of a 'professional' librarian with a trained librarian is all that useful - experience is an essential part of building an engaged career and (at least in the UK) lots of library studies students undertake their course whilst employed. 

If librarians are signing up for courses to extend their practical knowledge with theory then surely course coordinators can, at the same time, learn practice from the students? I dubious of the suggestion that study can make anyone 'professional', a qualification is one thing but professionalism is a heady cocktail of study and practical experience. 

Where is library2.0 'happening' except in libraries? One of the challenges for academia is that it has to engage with practice whilst also maintaining enough of a distance to allow far-sighted theory and research patterns to develop. To expect that, at the end of a course (never mind an undergraduate one), a student is equipped to move into the leading-edge of any field is unreasonable - for most, study is about learning key skills which can be applied to a work environment in order to expand and extend their capacity.

[Photo from Andrew Schwegler]

Review: Sony Reader

About a month ago I took the plunge and bought a Sony Reader after having used an iRex iLiad as a test device in work. All in all I've found the shift from paper to e-ink mostly trouble free. In Jasper Fforde's Thursday Next series (disclosure: Big fan!) books are just one type of ImaginoTransferenceDevice   and once you get past the initial oddity of reading off the e-ink screen you quickly become immersed. 

After a prolonged period of reading on the device I've tried to sum up my experiences in three key areas: build, interface and content.

Build

The screen of the Sony Reader is considerably smaller than the iLiad (6" vs 8.1") and, as a result, so is the device. The weight is also considerably less and all in all the reader is as easy to handle as a paperback book.

The case is metal, and the buttons etc are really nicely placed for my style of reading (right hand on the right edge, left on the bottom-left corner). I've had no real problems using the buttons but the forward/back buttons on the right edge do feel slightly flimsy and I've got my fingers crossed that they stand up to long-term use.

In general the device feels very stylish (unlike the iLiad I had no fear of using it on the train) as well as sturdy. No doubt the screen would suffer from any direct knocks, and I doubt it would like being used in the rain but the leather cover provided with the device helps to give some protection, and to ensure the device looks more like a designer accessory than a mini computer.

Interface

This is an area where I fully expected the Reader to lose out to the iLiad - but I was totally wrong. Firstly, the difference in boot time (from flicking the switch to reading a page) is astounding. With the iLiad I would turn it on, and then settle in to read (and even make a cup of tea) - with the Sony the delay from "Switch" to "On" is undetectable unless you've added some content, in which case it briefly indexes the content.

Unlike the iLiad, the Sony doesn't have a touch screen which means that there's no capacity for notes or other advanced features (although Sony's new PRS-700BC offers similar features). For me this isn't a problem, and in fact the limited '0-9' menu buttons work very well and disguise the lag which exists in all e-ink interfaces.

Changing pages is easy, and I prefer the placement of the buttons to the iLiad's 'flip' - which requires that you keep your left hand on the side of the reader continuously. There are additional features (MP3 playing, bookmarks etc) which seem to work well but are really secondary to the 'reading' function which is simple and elegant.

One down side is that the reader only offers 3 levels of zoom, whereas with the iLiad you're able to dynamically zoom using the stylus or use up to 5 levels of zoom for text files. 

Content

The reader copes with PDF, ePub, TXT, RTF, LRF & LRX formats (see here for more info). You can also convert from additional non-DRM formats (for which I use the free Calibre software). One annoyance is that often material (both free and purchased) is poorly formatted, with one 'page' taking a screen and a half on the Reader (leading to a half-blank page every two page-turns). I can't understand why this is as the formats and reader clearly allow re-pagination, it seems like a lack of effort on behalf of the ebook publishers.

 Free sources like Gutenberg are great places for content and you can buy books from Sony's partner - Waterstones (who have a truly awful ebook site) - along with other sites like Fiction Wise, W H Smith and Penguin.

It's in the content that the Sony falls down (to be fair, as does any ebook device). The range of ebooks available from online stores is tiny in comparison to print and it's common to find that only one book from a series is available online. The pricing is also, to put it mildly, insane! Commonly the ebook versions cost more than the paperback's in-store price, never mind Amazon or the used market.

As a quick example, here's prices for Tom Holt's book "Falling Sideways":

Waterstones Online e-book: £7.99

Waterstones Online Paperback: £7.99

Amazon.co.uk Price: £5.99

Amazon.co.uk Cheapest New Price: 38p
Amazon.co.uk Cheapest Used Price: 1p

To me, ebooks should cost considerably less than the printed copy - surely?

One final note: Annoyingly, the Reader doesn't support Mobipocket format ebooks which means that all the DRM'd books bought for the iLiad won't work on the Sony device. There's a lesson here I feel...

Conclusions

The good and bad in brief:

• The choice of content is (at least for now) disappointing and, unless you're willing to go down the route of bit torrent material of dubious quality and legality, you'll be paying more for it.
  
• The device itself is lovely, and you'll soon wonder why books seemed so special
• No back light is a good thing - you don't get tired reading the e-ink screen.
• No. You can't read in the bath - and you'd have to be brave to take it to the beach. But as soon as you count the weight difference between 2 paperbacks and this you'll still pack it for travel.
• I definitely read more - especially as finishing a book on a Sunday afternoon doesn't mean I have to wait until I get to the shops next Saturday. A few clicks and I've got a new book ready to go.
• Shopping is an unpleasant experience. Remember online book shopping before Amazon? Just like that, but with a range of incompatible formats to deal with as well. And non-net savvy users will probably stick to Waterstone's (poor & pricey) selection.

So, would I buy again? Absolutely. Would I recommend it? Well, that depends. If you're an avid reader it's a great way to keep content without filling up your spare room, but it's pricier and less flexible than dead tree. Who would get the most out of the Reader? If you're the kind of person who travels on trains and planes a lot, or carries loads of books this will be a great buy. Similarly, if you tend to constantly read and don't plan ahead (like me...) you'll appreciate the convenience of instant delivery. Oh, there's a lot of pulp lit as well by the looks of things if you're a fan.

For £199, the Sony Reader is a great buy but buy with your eyes open. This is an area ripe for growth and Amazon's decision to launch the Kindle platform has in many ways left them out of the more general eBook sales world. I'm not sure if that situation is sustainable, but if they don't start selling other formats I'm sure some other vendor will combine a breadth of stock with a simple interface and corner the market. Maybe Fiction Wise could do this with a sleek interface and brand growth.

Link Round Up

Some Fabulous Posts you might have missed:

• The Association of Research Libraries review of the publisher/google settlement. (Also, by Laurence Lessig here)
• Prepare yourself for Web10.0!
• The Christian Science Monitor is abandoning print and so is PC Magazine - who's next?
• Has RSS reached the plateau of productivity?
• Will a recession kill Libraries or is it a crisatunity?
• Watch a library being built in real time [via Library Stuff]
• Ever wanted a website for those people who can't search?

Social Networks for Digital Natives

Generally, there are two reactions to Facebook (and the ilk): What an opportunity! and What a waste of time!

Whatever your view, Facebook is an environment which allows libraries to connect to users (particularly 16-35 year old, middle class users...) and some libraries have made great use of the resource (example, example, example).

But, you'll find that it's mostly Higher Education (and some Further Education)-type libraries that are really engaging with Facebook. Why? Because lots of organisations have banned access - especially council authorities hosting public libraries.

Here's an interesting post on why Social Networking sites shouldn't be blocked [via Library Stuff]. It's a fair point, those of us who are 'heavy' web users don't find it easy to differentiate between 'work' and 'play' (and that swings both ways!). Those social networks are in both arenas and the tools are used in both ways. Ironically, the blurring of work and play which is often blamed for wasting time is probably going to be as essential as email over the coming years.

IT and personnel departments need to think carefully about exactly what they are preventing access to when they block these kind of sites (even if it's for 'ideological' reasons). Closing the door on opportunities by using technology to try and replace sensible and pragmatic management is never a good long term strategy and will only result in librarians losing out on skills, and patrons losing out on services.

Thought of the Day

Photo by Silversprite [via The Surly Librarian]

Jump Starting Your Web 2.0 Knowledge

UKOLN has published a set of Briefing Documents on Web2.0 (and other) issues which would act as a great introduction for anyone looking to catch up quickly with the technology in the area.

Well worth reading and sharing.

Skyscrapers Need Solid Foundations

There's a lot of interest in metasearch platforms/ discovery portals and the like and I've heard a lot of libraries talk about their experience with the 'dark records' - the poorly catalogued or generally dodgy data which lies within every Library Management System - which are brought to the surface by faceted navigation.

The Cataloguing Librarian has a great post on this very issue, which points out the one key piece of information every library should know: a state-of-the-art interface is only as good as your core data will let it be.

OCLC Round Up

Wow, there's been a lot of talk about OCLC's change in policy (which they had a few goes at - here's some the policy differences wikified). A fair amount of the reaction from librarians has been anger that the new policy might impede the work of LibraryThing and similar projects. It's strong to refer to records passed through WorldCat as 'infected' but you can see how an unfriendly policy can poison the viral spread of information.

As of February next, OCLC's new policy kicks in and - in essence - the rights of libraries over records contributed to WorldCat will change, and sharing (particularly for commercial reasons) will be more tightly controlled. Knock on effects are likely to be felt by both the open library community (deliberate non-caps there) and even organisations like Talis.

There's been an 'interesting' response from OCLC in the form of an open letter [pdf] - which seems to reflect many people's fear that OCLC is essentially circling the wagons and not trying to engage with the community.

For libraries, there are some key questions which need to be answered before February:

• What do we get from our arrangement with OCLC? Is it worth it?
• What are our plans for data which might be affected? How are the affected?

(ok, big gulp... and)

• Does OCLC represent the future or the past?

For me, it's the attitude that might be worrying. Take, for example, how Karen Calhoun (OCLC) refers to the idea of Commons:

OCLC's and the members' central asset is the WorldCat database that we share. It is our common investment, our "commons." I believe it is the right course to protect the commons.* Thus, as Garrett Hardin has suggested in his writings about the "tragedy of the commons," it is appropriate to regulate the use of the commons. OCLC needs to manage WorldCat data sharing to assure that benefit accrues back to the members who have invested in WorldCat, and that the WorldCat commons is not exhausted through over-exploitation. Protecting the commons means adopting "some rights reserved" as the data sharing model.  While a data sharing model based on "no rights reserved" is a laudable ideal, if OCLC were to adopt such a policy, it is possible, if not likely, that the WorldCat commons and the OCLC cooperative would not survive. 

If OCLC really want to engage with librarians (as opposed to Library managers) they need to quickly realise that WorldCat represents part of a wider metadata commons - and decide whether they want to fence off 'their' part with over-the-top guidelines or play and active role.

In case you need more, here's a good synopsis of the situation and there's a good page on the code4lib wiki - here.

Slow Posts

You may have noticed the lack of posts recently. I'm currently moving to a new role - with a specific focus on Web 2.0 - which, while very exciting, has meant a lot of time handing over 'old work'. 

Expect a trickle of posts until December....

Photo from edmittance