Collaboration and Social Software
From CS 160 Fall 2010
pdf Slides
Readings
- Shneiderman, Plaisant, Coen, Jacobs. Designing the User Interface. Chapter 9, Collaboration and Social Media Participation.
Your Response
Login by using your user name and password, edit the page and at the end of it put a whole line == ~~~~ == (literally) at the beginning of your submitted critique, so the wiki system will index, sign and date your submission automatically.
Sean Tai 01:47, 17 November 2010 (CET)
The reading described the surface-level functionality of recent collaborative internet technologies instead of offering any insights into how they were designed or developed, which was disappointing. However, the reading did show how new technologies allow for different methods and dynamics for human interaction. Thus, it is interesting to consider possible future technologies and their potential impact on society, as Google Wave has recently failed to introduce a new form of collaboration and Facebook announced their new “Messages” product on Monday, which aims to consolidate all messaging services into one.
Jonathan Look 02:01, 17 November 2010 (CET)
Regarding different means of communication, there are many factors that determine why some people prefer one form over another. I think some of those big factors hinge on convenience, access, and ease of use; things such as tweets, IM, email, or phone calls are much simpler to perform and to conduct at one's leisure than, say, to reserve a video conference room and conduct a conversation on the go.
The author did discuss electronic classrooms, and in my opinion, a hindrance in their adoption isn't so much as skepticism as it is costs. The author didn't seem to mention the costs involved in an electronic classroom, but I believe a major hindrance to any new form of collaborative technology can be its cost, regardless of how effective it may be.
Theron Ji 02:16, 17 November 2010 (CET)
I found this article pretty interesting, especially the idea of splitting social mediums into the 2x2 square, which at first didn't seem particularly intuitive, but after looking at the very common examples they gave, it made a lot more sense. I also noticed that this article was a lot more recent than many of the others we've read, since it referenced many of the newer technologies in today's world. Some of these media, especially the electronic meeting and classroom ones, are definitely still coming to its own, but given the success of some of the older examples he gave (email, IM, etc.), it looks promising that these could be the next big thing.
Frank Chew 04:24, 17 November 2010 (CET)
It is rare to find a document that so elegantly describes the new communication medias. In particular what was interesting was the matrix comprised of the two dimensions of time and space, in a manner that is up to date with the latest technology. One aspect about video conferencing that this article does not mention is that TV news has been doing video conferencing successfully for years. Perhaps video conferencing technology designers could learn from how newscasters have refined the look and UI of video conferencing.
Don Arboleda 04:43, 17 November 2010 (CET)
It's interesting to see how the technology has allowed a greater freedom in interconnectivity between people, as well as how that technology is ever growing and changing. Physical distance (inasmuch as intraplanetary communcations are concerned) no longer mean as much as they used to when it comes to the distribution of ideas and content. People so far apart from each other can share their thoughts with one another and even see the other's face--all this, and they needn't have met each other physically in the first place! It's almost a fact of life, now, that the person you've been speaking with could have as easily been a person from Britain as your next-door neighbor. I've heard complaints, however. Is technology bringing us closer together? Or is it tearing us apart by removing us from physical interactions? Something to think about.
Chris Song 05:33, 17 November 2010 (CET)
As students (especially those in CS or EECS), we are all very familiar with these collaboration tools and many more they didn’t even mention (such as SVN, etc). Computer scientists have been using similar collaboration tools for years. It is very interesting how these tools are used by virtually everyone now. To me this is not just about people’s needs or wants changing with times. It’s more indicative of how powerful and important UI design have become. Suppose the whole world has quad core computer and 100Mbit internet. Do you think people would be contributing to Wikipedia if they had to go through some UNIX command prompt in order to contribute? Of course not. Speedy chips, broadband, and cheaper notebooks all contributed to this phenomenon, but in the end it means nothing without easy UI design. Today, there are dozens of softwares for doing any particular task. To me, it seems that those that are popular are the ones with best designs. No matter how powerful tool, it’s impossible to gain social acceptance if only a few people can use it.
Alex Aberle 08:20, 17 November 2010 (CET)
For the love of god, why am I being told what emoticons are and how email works? This text is so clearly not meant for me. Thank god this is a recent book, at least it isn't using friendster and AOL chatrooms as examples.
I don't really understand what I'm supposed to take from this text. Its an explanation of different forms of communication, ok, but how does that apply to me as a designer? I already have experience with almost all the things mentioned, so it doesn't really expand my mind to read about them again, plus some mention of papers written on them.
On the "electronic classroom" section, specifically the picture of 12 people and graphs of their speech, body, and hand movements: I know for a fact that this would take a ton of resources to do at real time, especially if you went to 20-30 people. Two other things about technology in the classroom: one is that it is expensive. The US hardly spends enough on education to retain skilled teachers and up-to-date books, let alone computers in every classroom with all the software licenses that go with them. The second thing is that if I've learned anything from college it is that people using laptops are not paying attention to the lecturer a good portion of the time. Having a computer is just distracting, even if it does make note-taking faster.
Christine Lu 08:21, 17 November 2010 (CET)
This reading gave a good overview of the different advances in technology that have made changes to the way people collaborate with each other. In particular, the reading gives many very pertinent real-life examples, such as texting, Skype, e-mail, and Wikipedia. Each of these can be described as being in one of four time/space blocks. The article brings up points about the effect these technologies have in bringing people together, people who originally weren't able to meet face-to-face now have other means with which to communicate effectively. However, it also has the effect of pushing people away. Those who used to be able to meet face-to-face now opt for video conferencing tools to save money and time. These technologies are bridging the gap between the two worlds, but it's also leading to a concentration of use in the middle (as in, people are heavily relying on these conveniences instead of traditional methods).
Richard Laroue 08:23, 17 November 2010 (CET)
This was a useful reading. I absolutely agree with many of the points made about collaboration on software. For instance, the idea that three people collaborating on a single project can accomplish the same (or even more) than twice as many people working on their own. I've had many experiences where this has been true. However, it takes good coordination and a bit more overhead planning to really be able to benefit from collaboration like this.
Yue Chang Hu 08:26, 17 November 2010 (CET)
Interestingly this article covers many of the communication software that many, especially College student, uses daily for homework or work, keeping in contact with friends, or for fun. This article divides the types of software into two types of interfaces: Asynchronous Distributed Interfaces(such as email, blog, wiki) and Synchronous Distributed Interfaces (such as instant messengers, text, cellphone, video conferences). Interesting enough, both type of interface are very popular in today's world. I am not sure which type of interface people like more for communication, however, I did have to say that I like the Synchronous Distributed Interfaces more because it allows for more real life interactions.
Melissa Lim 08:28, 17 November 2010 (CET)
The section on electronic classrooms made me really skeptical, mainly because in my opinion, the beauty of my education as a child was that there was a lack of technology. I know that technology is evolving to serve a wider audience and set of needs, but there is still much work to be done in understanding important aspects of education that should perhaps be left to old-school ways. I agree that the concept of a virtual classroom can make it easier for students to voice their opinions and share information, but what about experiences that are vital to a child's development that cannot be equally replicated through current technology? Arts and crafts, hands-on science experiments, and practicing penmanship are all examples. There is something worthwhile in the experience of interacting with peers face to face and looking them straight in the eye rather than through a camera lens. Anyway, I suppose the answer to all these problems is more user research!
Bichen Wang 08:32, 17 November 2010 (CET)
Same-time, same-place equals brainstorming! Who would have guessed? This chapter pretty much summarizes some very basic electronic communication methods. Although this chapter itself was written fairly recently, the sources from which it draws from are quite outdated, at least in the computing world. A thing to note is that email services catch over 99% of spam (or at least Gmail does), and it should no longer be a huge problem that people are getting spammed all the time; however, this was not the case when email just came out. Spam should not be a valid argument as why to not use email. This chapter also says nothing about imageboards such as 4chan, and it fails to note the key purpose of social networking sites such as Facebook or MySpace. It seems Facebook is only good for IMing or something.
Raymond Williams 09:35, 17 November 2010 (CET)
As I read the chapter, the entire time, I couldn't help thinking about one of the quotes on the very first page. I don't mean to complain, but I think the quote needs a revision. The quote reads:
Three helping one another will do as much as six working singly.
This is good if your team works well together, but often in reality - there are conflicts of interest. Without a team leader making sure that decisions are made, there are many points at which the group must find some way to agree on something and make a decision. These road-blocks and dead-locks can waste valuable time while one lone person could be developing prototypes and actually getting work done. The fix is simple:
Three helping one another CAN do as much as six working singly.
It's not guaranteed. But I'm not done yet! What's the use of doing as well as they would singly? The goal of a group is to accomplish more than that which could have been accomplished singly. The group should be greater than the sum of its parts. Thus, a second revision of the quote:
Three helping one another can do BETTER THAN six working singly.
And now we have a quote that actually says something. We've gone from (3*2)==(1*6) to (3*2)>=(1*6).
Sui Kun Guan 09:49, 17 November 2010 (CET)
From the reading, I think that the figure 9.1 about Time/space four-quadrant matrix model of group-supported work gives me a new way to organize a group collaborative work. Group work can be combined two things from the two categories: same/different time, and same/different place. Each one has its pros and cons. For example, group members sitting in a conference room to do the discussion face-to-face can reduce the misunderstanding between each member's ideas because they can explain to each other, but it may not be practical for a project that require lots of meetings. On the other hand, on-line chatting conferencing can be helpful in such project because members can have a "meeting" whenever they are free in front of an computer, but they may not explain the ideas well. A good strategy for a group will be trying to using different models in figure 9.1 depending on the situation.
Tiago Bandeira 09:51, 17 November 2010 (CET)
Technology’s ability to help us communicate has both advantages and disadvantages as the article points out. In addition, the reading points out that when individuals work on a problem separately vs. in pairs the time it takes to complete a problem decreases. Furthermore, the variance between different individuals/teams time to solve said problem also decreases. I have also found this to be the case in practice. For instance, in pair programming, even if the partners have a relatively large variance in aptitude, the group will do better than if the team members worked separately. This is because it is much easier for someone to spot bugs if they are not coding themselves but simply involved in watching for them.
Geobio Boo 10:37, 17 November 2010 (CET)
It's interesting to stand back and take a look at social interactions, and think about how each has its benefits and disadvantages, and how they fit different needs for different things. The format of each form of communication (eg. newsgroup, email, chat room, wiki) fits different social needs, and must be adjusted (eg. mobile websites vs a full website) if they want to keep users. For me, I think I will start to notice these trends, and think about why I use certain things (eg. I email a lot with my brother and sister, because its non obtrusive, but effective and cleaer--however text when it's more time critical and short) for different needs.
Mark Wei 15:09, 17 November 2010 (CET)
The article correctly concedes that we are still discovering the conditions which make "synchronous" video conferencing optimal. Apart from business conferences and educational webcasting, most people find that the quick "lean" form of asynchronous communication like chat or texts to be preferable. However, the industry is currently making a big push for video conferencing. Almost all smartphones that are coming out have a front-facing camera. Apple has touted the FaceTime feature of the iPhone 4. Also, a feature of Google TV is the promise of video conferencing in front of your TV. The field of communications is not yet complete and still evolving.
Steven Kisely 10:17, 17 November 2010 (PST)
It is interesting to think about how far the internet has come from remote people working alone to hundreds supporting each other and an open software such as Ubuntu. “Three helping one another will do as much as six working singly”, is proven by these open software organizations. No, single person could create these software packages and maintain them alone. Yet, working people with a passion for the material working together (most having never met) can make an application that rivals software companies spent millions to develop.
Daniel Yoo 13:43, 17 November 2010 (PST)
In a process of building a good UI, I agree that collaboration and interacting with different people are very important in design. Even in my experience, sometimes people do not agree with my design and I am the only one who likes it. In that situation, I have to reconsider my design because if the other user is having a difficulty then it might as well call it a bad design. I like the time/space four-quadrant matrix model of group-supported work in the reading. From this reading, it is interesting to think about in the future how people would have better chance of communicating and collaborating with future device. From there on, people could share many ideas though communication and I am looking forward to that day.
Jeremy Sasson 20:00, 17 November 2010 (CET)
It is truly remarkable how far collaboration and social media participation has come over the last decade or so. I remember back when AOL Instant Messenger was just getting started and I was creating my first account. Now, technologies such as telepresence video conferencing can give the feeling that you are in the same room with someone who could very well be on the other side of the world. I believe it's only a matter of time before consumer telepresence becomes a household item. I also like the way this chapter organized the different means of communication through a time/space groupware matrix; it was a pretty effective way to split them up but still be comprehensive in reviewing them.
Aaron Loessberg-Zahl 20:04, 17 November 2010 (CET)
Despite the book's title, this chapter seemed to be less about designing the user interface, and more about describing it. It reads like some kind of "Business Internet for Dummies," explaining all the different types communication and social interaction ways and means. And while it was amusing to see terms such as "flame" or "lurker" explained as if I had never set foot (figuratively speaking) in the Internet, the novelty wore off fast, and I was left reading a bland text explaining to me things like e-mail, blogs, wikis, and social networks as if I had never heard of them before. Other texts in this class that told me about concepts I had already formed in my head at least got me to relate to them, if only to think, "Yeah, that makes sense. I guess I've thought that all along." This chapter however, is one long, bland description.
In terms of application to our projects, I can see how this may help people who have social interaction as a cornerstone of their app, but what about ours? I can see no way that a cash register can benefit (within reason) from anything described in this chapter. Maybe we can set up a listserver to send out the transaction record at the end of the day.
Vincent Rodriguez 20:18, 17 November 2010 (CET)
Communication is important to everyone and, as this article shows, it's a lot easier than ever to do so. Distance barriers are now no longer a hindrance thanks to all the tools available fr communication, such as email and message boards and the like. I feel that the article is a little too optimistic about the applications of all these tools, and as to how people will use them. Though these platforms are excellent as communication tools, they are hardly as grand as the article seems to suggest.
Alan.choi 20:21, 17 November 2010 (CET)
It's kind of nice to see how much technology is able to improve upon collaboration and replace traditional social means of communication. However, the article itself doesn't lend much to this class I feel like. It basically went out and describe many differnt types of softwares, pretty much all of which I already knew. I felt like the article could been better had it kind of done case studies and broken down the different layouts and styles of such softwares and compared them to even remotely relate to the course.
Derrick Tao 20:25, 17 November 2010 (CET)
With any development of an application or product, there is always some sort of interactions and collaborations that needs to be done. This article describes the importance of it and how to do it effectively. Some of the points of the article are very interesting because it acknowledges many things already known but puts it in a different light especially when describing some of the social media topics. However, i feel like it does get a bit pointless after the first point is made.
James Yu 20:33, 17 November 2010 (CET)
The chapter seemed to be a good introductory summary of a lot of different electronic collaboration tools and also social software. I like how they were able to separate the types by whether people were communicating in the same time and place. It also seemed fairly up to date about the different types. However, overall, I think the contents of the chapter probably is well known to most people in this class (college students) so it may not be as useful. On the issue of real time communication, for example video conferencing, I think the popularity is low because it is still expensive in most cases, video quality tends not to be too good, and eye to eye contact is frequently not possible. Also the other asychronous methods seem to work better with busy schedules.
Sung Ma 20:42, 17 November 2010 (CET)
The article today summarizes most of the basic communication method. I also believe that collaboration and interaction during the course of development is important in creating and building a decent user interface. It was interesting to browse through all sorts of communication methods although most of them we (as a cs or eecs students) already know. Still, it was useful to scan through many existing methods of social interactions. It wasn't anything brand new but it was a good review on what we currently have right now and I think this could be a step in developing a better communication network.
Karthik Jagadeesh 20:50, 17 November 2010 (CET)
The section that talked about the different types of collaborative processes and strategies was very interesting for me to read. Many of these different strategies are things that I have participated in, but I never consciously thought about this. It is nice to see them all listed out described so clearly, because in the future it will be easy to pick the correct way to work together. The strategies mentioned in the article are Focused partnerships, Lecture or demo, Conferences, Structured work processes, Meeting and decision support, Electronic commerce, Teledemocracy, Online communities, Colaboratories, and Telepresence.
Of these strategies, the one that really caught my attention was Electronic Commerce. Any time that I go on Ebay or Amazon or any site where I can purchase goods and I read comments from other users this is a form of collaboration. It is really interesting how people that I have never met before or people that I never really intend to meet, I can still trust them to give me recommendations on what sort of things to buy.
Danica Shei 20:55, 17 November 2010 (CET)
This article was definitely a good description of how technology has transformed from isolated computer usage to a communication tool that promotes interaction between people around the world. It provided good arguments on how email, texting, forums, picture tagging, videoconferencing can be categorized into different type of collaborations and/or social media participation and how each form has allowed groups of people to benefit from increased communication and efficiency of the communication. However, although I thought this article provides good arguments and examples, it didn’t bring up any unique points or discussions that I haven’t heard before. It didn’t have any interesting insights and enough arguments to support why certain technologies succeed better than others, or certain detriments of expanding technology. I feel if this article had some sort of twist to it, it would have been a much more enjoyable read.
Brian Maissy 21:03, 17 November 2010 (CET)
This is a very important topic, and also presents an interesting challenge. Collaborative software is an entirely new paradigm not only requiring new backend technologies (TPCIP, web 2.0 infrastructure) but also new user interface models. The essential aspect of this type of software is its transience. The content of the interface is constantly changing, so the interface itself must be a transparent window through which to see the collaborative data.
Arthur Huang 21:11, 17 November 2010 (CET)
It is interesting to really see the power of working in teams on projects; "Three helping one another will do as much as six working singly", as the quote says. Working with others and getting along with them is an important part of designing products, something I never really considered as important as programming skills. The power of communication is interesting as well, as it brings the world a lot closer, through the internet.
Calvin Wang 21:20, 17 November 2010 (CET)
This reading covers a lot of ground in social computing in all styles. I can resonate with most of the author’s claims. During my summer internship at Google, I had a chance to experience the ubiquity of digital communication in the modern corporate environment. Other than face-to-face time, which is common at Google due to the openness of its workspace, developer teams rely heavily on e-mail as their primary communication channel for everything, code-related or not. Specific to software production, there are code reviews, conducted in a forum-like manner where coworkers can comment on each other’s code and discuss improvements. This happens not only within teams but across different teams as well. In case two or more teams want to have a face-to-face meeting, an often preferred alternative is video conferencing. Last but not least, telephone is still the primary medium for communication with corporate customers and interviewees. It is amazing seeing how the different media of communication come together to enhance our productivity in the corporate world.
Soroosh Izadian 21:29, 17 November 2010 (CET)
as this article describes, different technologies are developed to enable faster and easier communication between users.online communities are formed based on practice or interest that gather people from different parts of the word and let them work or have fun together. this communal online presence is not possible though if the services' designs dont adopt to the concerns that rise from using these services. concerns like privacy, ease of use and user participation must be researched in the design cycle. the design team should continuously improve the design and moderators/regulators must monitor the network to provide a better experience for the users.
Adam Vogt 21:25, 17 November 2010 (CET)
This was a very well thought out article. My intention for what I was going to write for the this response was to find a means of collaboration that wasn’t addressed in the paper, but every time I came up with one I was able to find it in the paper. It’s impressive that this paper was able to address all of the main forms of collaboration including everything from blogs to texting to Twitter. I think the thing that this article made me think the most about is wondering what is next. What will the future bring in terms of technology that improves collaboration? I suppose Apple’s FaceTime is a step forward in collaboration technology giving people the ability to video chat even when they are on the go. I also feel like not enough focus was put on the possible ways of improving some of the collaboration methods. This reading felt a bit like a quick summary as opposed to a set of case studies which might have gone more into depth.
Edmundo 21:28, 17 November 2010 (CET)
Although a large part of this text dealt with things that I bet 99% of the class already knows, it is interesting to see collaboration and social media participation being broken down and analyzed in the time/space matrix. This model allows for an easier characterization of the different collaborative interfaces. I felt like there was a big chart missing at the end of the chapter comparing all the big collaboration tools by their uses and limitations. I also feel like not enough focus was put on the possible ways of improving some of the collaboration methods. This reading felt a bit like a quick summary as opposed to a set of case studies which might have gone more into depth.
Robert Connick 21:31, 17 November 2010 (CET)
I think that the strength of technology as a tool for collaboration currently has to lie in its distributed applications. While it might be cool to have a classroom completely wired, the information transferred even during a video conference pales in comparison to that of a conventional face-to-face interaction. Still, some things are hard to communicate without electronics, for example large portions of code and other digital data. The question for user interface designers then, is how to get the best of both worlds. While the SMART Board looks promising, it is also very specialized and probably expensive. Filling classrooms with PCs is also expensive (although most students have laptops so that is somewhat mitigated), but using a computer can hinder the face-to-face interactions.
Benjamin Carpenter 21:38, 17 November 2010 (CET)
The PDF provides a good overview of the different types of interactive media available on the web, along with different justifications for each. While all of these tools are useful online, it seems there is still a deficiency of usability when it comes to using these tools on mobile devices. For example, while CSS and newer versions of HTML have made it easier to design with mobile devices in mind, it is still difficult to give large amounts of text input through a mobile device. Most input from mobile devices is very short, and much of the interaction is read-only (browsing, reading, etc.). It would be great if using these tools on a cell phone were as easy as talking.
Andy Lin 21:37, 17 November 2010 (CET)
Communication and collaboration are always important for the society. However, it is hard to reach people when the phone was not even invented. This article clearly points out the different kinds of collaboration and social software used in different situations which people might have to talk to each other in different or same time and places. We are in the generation that participates with the growth of this technology, and I think it is truly amazing and convenient. I really looking forward to seeing what else can the collaboration and social software be improved.
Robin Liu 21:46, 17 November 2010 (CET)
The social dynamics of the internet is one of the more interesting and less well explored fields in the current technological age. The article does a good job of partitioning the interaction space of online communication along 2 parameters (time and location), which allows for further investigation of what modes of interaction are most efficient for particular tasks. It also allows for rumination of newer tasks that previously couldn’t be accomplished without the web. The chapter was fairly thorough in covering different methods of communication, but it was not very detailed. It only briefly discussed the issues of online identity and how differently people act online.
Courtney Wang 21:47, 17 November 2010 (CET)
The fact that this article exists and is necessary speaks to the fact that communication and collaboration, critical parts of designing and implementing good products, is probably one of the most difficult parts of development. One refreshing aspect of today's reading was its modern relevance. The survey of technology and interactive media tools that I use on a daily basis showed me ways that I can use existing accessible tools to improve my collaboration skills. I've always believed that the internet's most important use for the future of the world is the amount of interaction it can facilitate. With open-source projects growing by the minute and more efforts to make the internet a social and creative space, I foresee even bigger leaps in innovation as the technologies for collaboration and social media continue to evolve. Version control with foundations like github and assembla and even google code have now made software development much more collaborative and sharable.
Bernard_Wong 21:51, 17 November 2010 (CET)
Collaboration and coordination can be very chaotic, either within a workplace environment or in a school project environment. Different team member contribute differently, with different skills, taste, and the nature or doing things. Some collaboration tools like google doc, web chat, svn, etc, are very important, however, in-person collaboration, like pair programming is equally important. Team meeting and team discussions about the direction of the product and development ensures that creativity is constantly bounding back and forth within partner of the team.
James Butkovic 21:56, 17 November 2010 (CET)
There's a lot of study around what the best way to collaborate with people on a project is. This is especially true when project management is taken to the internet, which is the instance discussed in the article. Computer usability is much more of a solved problem compared to the problem of how best to get people to use a piece of software wherein they have to collaborate with each other. I liked how the article was concerned with these tools becoming oppressive, which is exactly what I think we're likely to see once our project management / employee reward / recognition tools become fully matured and ubiquitous on the internet.
Asa Zernik 22:04, 17 November 2010 (CET)
This piece looks at a community as, in essence, part of the Human-Computer Interface; in the examination of Wikipedia, for example, the ease of joining the community, the ability for the user to decide the level of involvement, etc. are described in much the same way as the difficulties of tasks a human performs individually. By including face-to-face interaction and very indirect interaction (e.g. college application submissions online) in the survey of social computing, this chapter touches on some of the aspects of contextual inquiry - that for any task, the knowledge of the social context in which it is performed is essential to design. (Sorry about late submission; AirBears was on the fritz)
Simran Chaudhry 22:05, 17 November 2010 (CET)
I think the article did a good job putting tech/communication in the context of wider societal factors.
Tech has been able to break down the barriers to communication. The article doesnt include this, but one of the first stepping stones to this was the printing press -- making the spread of ideas through printed text much easier. Next major step: telephone/telegram, making communication and collaboration more instant. Next major step: the Internet -- similar to the printing press in that we could share text, but now on a much larger scale (many more people can collaborate). Next, mobile: breaking the barriers of location (not having to be connected to a computer to collaborate). There are probably dozens of smaller steps between these as well. We will certainty continue along this path -- breaking down barriers that limit our communication and collaboration and incorporating more rich media (voice, video, etc).
I think the most important point that that the article makes is: the adoption of a new communication/collaboration medium depends on society. The immediate example I thought of was Google Wave. Wave was hailed the next-gen of email – and as a technology, was a failure. There are probably a couple things that went wrong there, but I think one of them is that people just didn’t know how to use it in context of all their other communication mediums.
Karl He 22:08, 17 November 2010 (CET)
Some forms of collaborative software have definitely impacted the way I do things. Google Docs, for example, has become a central form of both collaborative work and communication between my team members when we are not present in the same room. Both asynchronous and synchronous interfaces have their advantages; while synchronous interfaces tend to bring subjects to immediate attention (IMs, emails), asynchronous interfaces tend have information presented with authority, where there is much less clutter of information. The difference resembles that of the changes in UI from the console to the GUI, where the console represents the asynchronous, passive interface that the user prompts, and the GUI resembles the synchronous interface which brings information to the user.
Alexander Wong 19:52, 19 November 2010 (CET)
The article did a great job of analyzing collaboration. What's most interesting to me is sort of the progression of collaboration techniques. Most of it being brought through the Internet. My company writes web-based operations management software for a niche market, managing client information, ordering, and tracking in addition to a host of other things. Prior to our introduction into this niche market, most of our users were emailing excel spreadsheets across continents or zipping entire databases. With the advent of voip and Skype, the landscape and possibilities of collaboration are quickly becoming boundless.
Avery Gee 19:53, 22 November 2010 (CET)
I think it is interesting that asynchronous and synchronous communication systems have benefits to what may seem like drawbacks for the other. For example, the time delay in asynchronous systems is actually useful because it gives people time to write down exactly what they want. Thus, I think it is really useful when the systems are merged. For example on facebook you have both asynchronous and synchronous parts. You can chat in real time or you can send messages or post in asynchronous time. This could be what makes it more popular than blogs (besides the fact that it has a better friend network).
