Android vs. iphone was the debate in this week’s readings and discussions. This debate was also outlined as Freedom vs. Comfort. I’m going to choose this week to outline my experiences with both apple iphone 3Gs using iOS and now upgrading to the Samsung Galaxy S2 on Android.
Firstly I want to talk about my experiences with the iphone. I have always been one to have new phones, and when I was up for a plan upgrade I decided to get the 3Gs. I was so excited to when the package arrived, beautiful packaging harbouring an equally attractive and sleek mobile device. My excitement soon died when I realised the difficulty I had when setting it up. I had to download iTunes to put music onto the device, a program I wasn’t familiar with. With that I had to register an ITunes account, along with bank card details, address, numbers and the rest. Not to mention the frustrations when trying to customise the phone to suit my own personal taste. Something as simple as changing the ringtone turned out to be a frustrating task, as I began to realise the Apple style of doing things. Limited in customisation, I felt I was stuck in operating the phone exactly the way they wanted it to be used. Getting music off my friends was a hassle, putting photos onto the phone was impossible, and many other tasks began to frustrate me to the point of ‘jailbreaking’ the phone. But before this decision could be made, I had a drink spilled on me on a night out ruining the phone instantly.
This led me to an eventual upgrade to the Samsung Galaxy S2 on Android. A vast difference from the iphone, the packaging arrived in a much simpler packaging to a less sleek design in phone. After the underwhelming arrival, I soon witnessed the freedom in which the Android operating system offered. Easily customisable, I was able to able to upload music, change ringtones and download media till my heart’s content.
Although I do see benefits from comfort. The iphone’s user-friendly interface and many products and accessories make it a powerful smartphone. But from going to the apple iphone to the Galaxy on Android I would never go back. Freedom all the way!
Week 11.
This week we analyse social networks and their contributions as platforms for social revolutions. The reading this week from the guardian was a particularly interesting one, outlining that we mustn’t be too technological deterministic when analysing revolutions and the role social networks play in such uprisings. This is in reference to Cyber-utopians, when referencing the actions of the Arab Spring, with revolutions arising in Tunisia and Egypt and Libya and the likes. This article criticises this mindset that social media networks conjure social revolutions, under-mining the actions of real-world activism.
This is correct, as after all it does take real-life people to use such sites, people who have real-life problems and views which long to be voiced. I believe the point is valid, and argument is correct but I still can’t help but be frustrated by the level of cynicism this article takes, and undermines the power in which the conglomerate of people social media tools allows for, and undermines the utopia in which the internet could be seen for. It is true that activism does start with real-life activism, the time and space compression in which the internet allows should never be disregarded. Morozov (2011) seeks to criticise the platforms in general (Facebook, Twitter) as mere fads, and by portraying them as means of spreading democracy in order to justify our excessive use, just seems like a personal vendetta against such social media tools, a view not understood by someone not brought up surrounded by such technologies.
After all is said and done, I do see positives coming from social media tools, and can see their possibilities in helping create this global community, Regardless of the name of the social media platform, the web must be analysed as a network in itself, truly revolutionising the way we interact. But we must still not be too technologically deterministic when analysing such mediums, as it does start with people, but at the same time we mustn’t disregard the power that comes with linking up global communities through networks over the internet, using various social media tools.
This is correct, as after all it does take real-life people to use such sites, people who have real-life problems and views which long to be voiced. I believe the point is valid, and argument is correct but I still can’t help but be frustrated by the level of cynicism this article takes, and undermines the power in which the conglomerate of people social media tools allows for, and undermines the utopia in which the internet could be seen for. It is true that activism does start with real-life activism, the time and space compression in which the internet allows should never be disregarded. Morozov (2011) seeks to criticise the platforms in general (Facebook, Twitter) as mere fads, and by portraying them as means of spreading democracy in order to justify our excessive use, just seems like a personal vendetta against such social media tools, a view not understood by someone not brought up surrounded by such technologies.
After all is said and done, I do see positives coming from social media tools, and can see their possibilities in helping create this global community, Regardless of the name of the social media platform, the web must be analysed as a network in itself, truly revolutionising the way we interact. But we must still not be too technologically deterministic when analysing such mediums, as it does start with people, but at the same time we mustn’t disregard the power that comes with linking up global communities through networks over the internet, using various social media tools.
Week 9
This week we are exploring the dark-side of the internet, as we analyse online activism in regards to various counter cultures. Web 2.0 has allowed people to communicate on a global level, allowing more weight behind protests, combining like-minded people to communicate and also allowing more sinister means of expressing views through hacking into corporate system.
I found Crabtree’s article quite interesting, with the implications and opportunities the internet brings to the political sphere. This new term E-democracy seems like the direction political debates are taking as Crabtree outlines the various political channels web 2.0 harbours. This includes Civic-hacking, allowing like minded people to come together, increasing political engagement.
But there is also a more sinister approach to online activism, with online hacking circles such as Anonymous and Lulzsec, who voice their values, opinions and political agendas through the hacking of various corporate and political websites. Such is stated by a twitter post from an Anonymous member: “(Anonymous) is against oppressive regimes, corruption, police brutality, government cover-ups, the arrest and murder of people in any nation.”
Read more: http://www.news.com.au/technology/anonymous-hack-the-syrian-ministry-of-defence/story-e6frfro0-1226111177907#ixzz1cJRmvaAz
But with these implications also comes opportunity. My generation particularly has become complacent with democracy, uninterested with politics and overall over not having their opinions and voices heard. This can be changes through global communications allowed through the internet and web 2.0. It can give a two-way means of communicating to political leaders, as more and more adopt social media outlets such as Facebook, Youtube and Twitter. The internet can be revolutionise the political landscape of Australia, and I personally think this has not been exploited or even accepted by Politian’s or political leaders as their lack of adaption technology means they are falling behind the 8-ball. A perfect example would be an essay I wrote for my politics class earlier in my degree, on social media and its implications for democracy and political change. The viewpoint was looked at with great cynicism and overall apathy as he was unable to see the implications that a person interested in digital communications could see, disregarding any relevance to my claims. This cynicism will soon change as more democratic and political change sparks through the use of social media and internet applications.
I found Crabtree’s article quite interesting, with the implications and opportunities the internet brings to the political sphere. This new term E-democracy seems like the direction political debates are taking as Crabtree outlines the various political channels web 2.0 harbours. This includes Civic-hacking, allowing like minded people to come together, increasing political engagement.
But there is also a more sinister approach to online activism, with online hacking circles such as Anonymous and Lulzsec, who voice their values, opinions and political agendas through the hacking of various corporate and political websites. Such is stated by a twitter post from an Anonymous member: “(Anonymous) is against oppressive regimes, corruption, police brutality, government cover-ups, the arrest and murder of people in any nation.”
Read more: http://www.news.com.au/technology/anonymous-hack-the-syrian-ministry-of-defence/story-e6frfro0-1226111177907#ixzz1cJRmvaAz
But with these implications also comes opportunity. My generation particularly has become complacent with democracy, uninterested with politics and overall over not having their opinions and voices heard. This can be changes through global communications allowed through the internet and web 2.0. It can give a two-way means of communicating to political leaders, as more and more adopt social media outlets such as Facebook, Youtube and Twitter. The internet can be revolutionise the political landscape of Australia, and I personally think this has not been exploited or even accepted by Politian’s or political leaders as their lack of adaption technology means they are falling behind the 8-ball. A perfect example would be an essay I wrote for my politics class earlier in my degree, on social media and its implications for democracy and political change. The viewpoint was looked at with great cynicism and overall apathy as he was unable to see the implications that a person interested in digital communications could see, disregarding any relevance to my claims. This cynicism will soon change as more democratic and political change sparks through the use of social media and internet applications.
WEEK 8- Citizen Journalism.
As we further analyse Web 2.0, we can further analyse the effects of the autonomy the new digital era. This autonomy and decentralisation has taken the power away from traditional means of media production, as the information age takes over the industrial age.
Personally, I have witnessed the diminishing industrial journalism and media outlets and can say I am a contributor to the movement. I consume most of my news and other media purely from web based services, including formal news sites, right through to citizen journalism blogs.
But there has been a backlash to this ‘rise in the amateur’ cult facilitated by web 2.0, many of which come from professionally trained leaders of each sector affected. None more so then Andrew Keen, who’s The Cult of the Amateur: How Today's Internet Is Killing Our Culture fronts this argument against this rise in amateurs in all sectors, claiming it is taking away from professional currency, and pushing a “cut-and-paste” culture of information exchange. More on this argument can be found here at: http://bit.ly/s5uCmI
This argument stems from the lack of “gate-keeping” of the internet, with no filtering of content any person with access and know-how can start blogging, sharing information avoiding such gate-keeping barriers such as traditional publishers would put on professional authors. This allows any information, regardless of its ‘truth’, integrity or even quality to be published and consumed by wide audiences.
I can see this being somewhat accurate, but minus all the garbage the internet does also harbour quality sites. Crikey being for example, producing as vast range of views, and journalistic stories opposed to more bias traditional newspapers, following agendas of such tycoons as Rupert Murdoch.
All and all an interesting debate has arisen, and will sure to be still on the top of professionals lists to moan about. But traditional professionals are beginning to become more obsolete, and it is more of a case to adapt to the technology or become irrelevant to this era. This is also my own person reasoning to do digital communications as a minor as my study, to help keep me relevant particularly in the rise of web services and tools and implications for marketing
Personally, I have witnessed the diminishing industrial journalism and media outlets and can say I am a contributor to the movement. I consume most of my news and other media purely from web based services, including formal news sites, right through to citizen journalism blogs.
But there has been a backlash to this ‘rise in the amateur’ cult facilitated by web 2.0, many of which come from professionally trained leaders of each sector affected. None more so then Andrew Keen, who’s The Cult of the Amateur: How Today's Internet Is Killing Our Culture fronts this argument against this rise in amateurs in all sectors, claiming it is taking away from professional currency, and pushing a “cut-and-paste” culture of information exchange. More on this argument can be found here at: http://bit.ly/s5uCmI
This argument stems from the lack of “gate-keeping” of the internet, with no filtering of content any person with access and know-how can start blogging, sharing information avoiding such gate-keeping barriers such as traditional publishers would put on professional authors. This allows any information, regardless of its ‘truth’, integrity or even quality to be published and consumed by wide audiences.
I can see this being somewhat accurate, but minus all the garbage the internet does also harbour quality sites. Crikey being for example, producing as vast range of views, and journalistic stories opposed to more bias traditional newspapers, following agendas of such tycoons as Rupert Murdoch.
All and all an interesting debate has arisen, and will sure to be still on the top of professionals lists to moan about. But traditional professionals are beginning to become more obsolete, and it is more of a case to adapt to the technology or become irrelevant to this era. This is also my own person reasoning to do digital communications as a minor as my study, to help keep me relevant particularly in the rise of web services and tools and implications for marketing
THE INTERNET OF THINGS- Making life easier.
Picture this, whilst out at the beach enjoying the sun and company of friends I receive a message from this girl I have been talking to. She suggests that we hang out at my house, maybe watch a movie and relax. I willingly agree, but while driving home I remember the state of my room- neglected due to my busy uni schedule and overall untidiness is make the state of my room far from “girl approved”. A frantic rush when I get home, cleaning the floors, opening windows, changing the sheets and spraying the room with fragrances as I remember the dissatisfaction of her last visit of the “guy” smell which filled the room.
Now forward to a time when the ‘internet of things’ has been adopted, where objects are no longer static but have agency to monitor and independently initiate action. The Ericsson advert (shown in lecture) really opened my eyes to the possibilities of the future.
If the same situation occurred to me when these objects are ‘tangible social actors’, the room I live in could be connected through interactive objects, into one unified network. Rather than a frantic dash to clean my room and organise the night, each object would record data, such as cleanliness, room temperature aromas and various other stats regarding the room. After a quick message to my networked room regarding the situation “female company” in this case, each object could act accordingly; windows open, fans turn on automatically, room deodoriser sets off and laptop begins to download a movie (horror is her favourite).
This utopian approach to the technological changes of objects is one I wish to hope the outcomes come from such innovation supported by android and their open source technology. But as a marketing major, I tend to think such innovation will be exploited to record and track personal data, for the benefits of corporations in order to further push products onto us (as seen in minority report).
Also the tales of things technology seems very interesting to me, by being able to add a story through annotations and QR codes to any space or object. I find this means of communications influential in passing down family stories. Family heirlooms and their stories attached to such items could be recounted; reinforcing their importance and speciality through such accounts from the role they played in that current family member’s life, and could be updated as they are passed down. This can be seen as a new way of ‘story-telling’. But once again, I can not help to think of the marketing implications of this technology, but never the less this seems to be inevitable.
Now forward to a time when the ‘internet of things’ has been adopted, where objects are no longer static but have agency to monitor and independently initiate action. The Ericsson advert (shown in lecture) really opened my eyes to the possibilities of the future.
If the same situation occurred to me when these objects are ‘tangible social actors’, the room I live in could be connected through interactive objects, into one unified network. Rather than a frantic dash to clean my room and organise the night, each object would record data, such as cleanliness, room temperature aromas and various other stats regarding the room. After a quick message to my networked room regarding the situation “female company” in this case, each object could act accordingly; windows open, fans turn on automatically, room deodoriser sets off and laptop begins to download a movie (horror is her favourite).
This utopian approach to the technological changes of objects is one I wish to hope the outcomes come from such innovation supported by android and their open source technology. But as a marketing major, I tend to think such innovation will be exploited to record and track personal data, for the benefits of corporations in order to further push products onto us (as seen in minority report).
Also the tales of things technology seems very interesting to me, by being able to add a story through annotations and QR codes to any space or object. I find this means of communications influential in passing down family stories. Family heirlooms and their stories attached to such items could be recounted; reinforcing their importance and speciality through such accounts from the role they played in that current family member’s life, and could be updated as they are passed down. This can be seen as a new way of ‘story-telling’. But once again, I can not help to think of the marketing implications of this technology, but never the less this seems to be inevitable.
5
comments
Sunday, 23 October 2011
Web 2.0- Participatory Media
As we further explore the global communications we are immersed into what we know as Web 2.0, which can be explained as participatory media. This differs from traditional media, one which does not account for interactivity between the creator and the user.
As explained by O’Reilly (2011) this evolved a former ‘over-hyped’ technology of web 1.0, one which was one-to-many flow of communication, reflecting that of more traditional media such as newspapers, where users were unable to create, edit, comment and participate freely with content.
This new emergence of web 2.0 also brought the search system of “folksonomy”, which challenged the traditional taxonomy directory, which allowed a collaborative system of categorisation, through tagging, annotating and social indexing, and a system which derives value through user participation.
This reflects the idea of the “long-tail” which can be seen to be opposite to the “mainstream”. This derives from a mass audience created through many niche audiences. As explained by Anderson (2004), web 2.0 has given the user the freedom to have access to a vast amount of content, suited to our own unique interests, free from the previous restricted content driven by economy, through content targeting the lowest common denominator.
This aspect is the most attractive to me, as many of my interests in relation to music, movies and overall reading content are rarely shown through mainstream media. I think all our interests can never be fully satisfied by mainstream media, thus new web 2.0 platform is a way of allowing all our various niche interests to be satisfied by these abundance of content. I know I don’t want to be stuck watching LA ink for tattoo related issues, watching MTV for my music content or stuck reading The Australian for news and political information… Hurray for web 2.0!
O'Reilly, T. (2005) 'What is Web 2.0' O'Reilly Media.[URL: http://oreilly.com/web2/archive/what-is-web-20.html]
Anderson, C. (2004). The Long Tail. Wired, 12.10 [URL: http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/12.10/tail.html]
As explained by O’Reilly (2011) this evolved a former ‘over-hyped’ technology of web 1.0, one which was one-to-many flow of communication, reflecting that of more traditional media such as newspapers, where users were unable to create, edit, comment and participate freely with content.
This new emergence of web 2.0 also brought the search system of “folksonomy”, which challenged the traditional taxonomy directory, which allowed a collaborative system of categorisation, through tagging, annotating and social indexing, and a system which derives value through user participation.
This reflects the idea of the “long-tail” which can be seen to be opposite to the “mainstream”. This derives from a mass audience created through many niche audiences. As explained by Anderson (2004), web 2.0 has given the user the freedom to have access to a vast amount of content, suited to our own unique interests, free from the previous restricted content driven by economy, through content targeting the lowest common denominator.
This aspect is the most attractive to me, as many of my interests in relation to music, movies and overall reading content are rarely shown through mainstream media. I think all our interests can never be fully satisfied by mainstream media, thus new web 2.0 platform is a way of allowing all our various niche interests to be satisfied by these abundance of content. I know I don’t want to be stuck watching LA ink for tattoo related issues, watching MTV for my music content or stuck reading The Australian for news and political information… Hurray for web 2.0!
O'Reilly, T. (2005) 'What is Web 2.0' O'Reilly Media.[URL: http://oreilly.com/web2/archive/what-is-web-20.html]
Anderson, C. (2004). The Long Tail. Wired, 12.10 [URL: http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/12.10/tail.html]
2
comments
Sunday, 4 September 2011
Always connected: Affecting work and social life.
This week’s discussion surrounding the merging of work and leisure was a real eye-opener for future career aspirations with new trends expecting to be available 24/7. As the internet and mobile technologies have progressed and become more advanced, the physical space of the office and being physically present in the office is now not the only time and place you are expected to do work. Smartphones and personal laptops are an essential item to many professions involved in ‘information’ processing industry, and such constant pressures to be always connected have had many adverse affects.
Personally I find myself multitasking more and more, whether it is helping me to complete tasks more effectively or at a high standard is debatable. I find if I am doing Uni assessments, I’ll be also multitasking other things, including my social life with my laptop and phone both getting a heavy workout. I find myself producing my best work when I buckle down at the library, with minimal distractions, (no Facebook, no reception) and wonder whether working outside of the office has the same negative effect, by completing tasks at a poorer standard.
Finally, the debate over whether Facebook and this notion of being ‘always connected’ effects social interactions. In my own observations, although I am a heavy user of Facebook, I do find myself and others being detached from conversations and various situations, as more and more time is spent checking, updating and uploading on social networks via smartphones. Ted made an interesting comparison to two identical social situations happening in two different cultures. With youths in Istanbul engaging in fiery and passionate conversations, where as the Western culture is becoming more and more detached as these ‘social’ tools are starting to have an adverse effect.
But I still manage to log into Facebook as much as possible, but am becoming aware when it may be having the reverse effect to my social life, and making sure there is a time when I can disconnect and enjoy the moment at hand.
Personally I find myself multitasking more and more, whether it is helping me to complete tasks more effectively or at a high standard is debatable. I find if I am doing Uni assessments, I’ll be also multitasking other things, including my social life with my laptop and phone both getting a heavy workout. I find myself producing my best work when I buckle down at the library, with minimal distractions, (no Facebook, no reception) and wonder whether working outside of the office has the same negative effect, by completing tasks at a poorer standard.
Finally, the debate over whether Facebook and this notion of being ‘always connected’ effects social interactions. In my own observations, although I am a heavy user of Facebook, I do find myself and others being detached from conversations and various situations, as more and more time is spent checking, updating and uploading on social networks via smartphones. Ted made an interesting comparison to two identical social situations happening in two different cultures. With youths in Istanbul engaging in fiery and passionate conversations, where as the Western culture is becoming more and more detached as these ‘social’ tools are starting to have an adverse effect.
But I still manage to log into Facebook as much as possible, but am becoming aware when it may be having the reverse effect to my social life, and making sure there is a time when I can disconnect and enjoy the moment at hand.
0
comments
Friday, 19 August 2011
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)