Showing posts with label review. Show all posts
Showing posts with label review. Show all posts

eReader/Tablet Review: Barnes & Noble Nook HD 7"

Nook HD 7" and a piece of toast, courtesy of barnesandnoble.com. I don't know why.

For the paperless academic on a budget


Virtually every article about improving one's academic workflow (note-taking, reading, writing and general office/mobile productivity) begins and ends with the iPad. In some respects, makes a lot of sense. On top of design, branding and marketing elements, Apple also has the advantage of a well-stocked app store. An important trade-off here is a hefty price tag. Meanwhile, there are plenty of devices for well under $200 that offer promising features and competitive app stores as well as the ability to sideload content and apps. Android devices, for example, fit the needs of students and academics extremely well, if not better than their Apple counterparts. First and foremost, many Android or even Windows phones and tablets are more likely to have expandable memory, which is great if you don't keep all of your files in cloud storage and/or if you are not likely to have a regular data or WiFi connection (such as in the field).

Which brings me to my next point: academics actually have a particular and sometimes peculiar set of needs for their devices. These admittedly vary from person to person, by discipline, age, work environment and place on or off the departmental food chain. For me, I focus mainly one three major tasks, in order of importance: 1. Reading. A lot of reading. 2. Taking and making notes. 3. Saving and organizing files. Everything else from photos and video to social media is secondary for the purposes of this review, but certainly not altogether unimportant.

There are a couple more caveats. I'm a strong believer that you should only ever invest in the technology you need instead of overspend on technology you'll never make full use of. So it's best to read this review keeping in mind how you like to work and what you find necessary or unnecessary; intuitive or counter-intuitive. A lot of people come to me for advice about buying tablets or other gadgets. I wish I could say that it always surprises me how often they fail to consider actual needs - what they'll be trying to do with the device - rather than its looks, brand name or quirky functions (that phone doesn't have the app where I can remote start my car's ignition from Mars, I'd better spend the additional $200 and upgrade my service plan ...). If you were taking a tablet to the field for actual fieldwork tasks (interviews, etc.), I would likely recommend something designed for that kind of work, like the Galaxy Note 10.1 or potentially an iPad, but that is a separate review.

Even though I'm a lover of gadgets, for day-to-day use, I actually find tablets rather fiddly for things like social media or anything that involves a lot of typing. I don't play games, listen to music, Skype chat or even watch videos on mine. I have a laptop with internet access, a phone and a media player, so I don't need a tablet to recreate all of the functions that these individual devices do very well. Instead, I want it to supplement the repetitive and/or arduous tasks that my other devices do rather poorly. That is, I need a more effective portable library to store, read and annotate PDFs and eBooks. As it happens, the Nook HD 7" is excellent as both an eReader and a tablet and is therefore worth reviewing as for a device to help academics go paperless on a budget.

That said, it's far from perfect.


About the Nook HD


B&N mostly makes eReaders like the highly rated Nook Simple Touch. Indeed, after B&N's earlier stumbles with the Nook Tablet and Nook Color, the Nook HD itself started its life as more of a glorified eReader than a full-fledged Android tablet. Upon its release, the Nook HD series was burdened by lackluster software including a useless web browser and a very limited app store. However, the recent Google Play update (late 2012) bumped the NookHD/HD+ into fully fledge Android tablet terrain – albeit still somewhat constrained by B&N's restricted version of the operating system - and returned this once unassuming device to my radar. Those with the technical know-how can root it fairly easily to free themselves from B&N's walled garden, but most general users won't need to. (Rooting voids your warranty, which you might not want to do given a software glitch that affects these devices within the return period. See below. Also, regular software updates from Nook will break your root). Just run the update out of the box to get full access to the Google suite of apps including the Play Store, Play Books, Music, Magazines, Chrome web browser, etc.

I chose the 7" HD because it's a good crossover device and therefore best value for my needs. It allows me to read and markup my thousands of academic PDFs while also being lightweight and comfortable enough to read novels. I have something like 2,000 books and articles on my Nook HD added in the three months or so that I've owned it. It also comes in a 9" (HD+) option, which is probably best suited for purely academic work because you get more screen area to work with, so those three-column academic papers require less zooming/scrolling. Socio-cultural anthropology doesn't get much of these multicolumn pages, but my recent foray into cognitive anthropology has been another story. The 7" version is optimal for all other types of books. The lower profile and weight reduces wrist strain and is preferable for those with smaller hands like myself. I tried both out in my local B&N, where they were the same price ($149 for 16GB. There's an 8GB 7" for $129 while the 9" 32GB is $179) and went for the 7" for portability even though the 9" screen was appealing. They've been on sale for as low as $79.


Specifications


Rating: 4.5 out of 5

The full technical specs for the Nook HD are available here. I'll go over what I see as the key points, especially those specs that stand out from the competition.

Speed: the device is fairly nippy with a Dual Core 1.3ghz processor and 1GB RAM. It runs Android 4.0.4 Ice Cream Sandwich (modified by B&N).

Storage capacity: Internal storage varies by price (see above), but you get virtually unlimited storage space because it takes micro SD memory cards up to 64GB for expansion. Not only is this great to have and a definite advantage over other devices that lack expandable memory, but in the case of the Nook HD, its software makes storing your files on an external card highly recommended (again, more on this below). Expandable memory is noticeably absent from the Google Nexus, iPad mini and Kindle Fire HD/X.

Connectivity: On one hand, the Nook HD/HD+ require proprietary charging/data cables which are pretty expensive to replace in the US. On the other, the device charges really quickly compared to, say, the Amazon Kindle HD. I can get a full charge from empty in around 1.5 hours. WiFi-only for downloads and no NFC.

Battery life: Out of the box, I estimate about 9 hours for reading, but just going through the menus and flipping between apps can have noticeable effect. Since I mostly read, I've turned down the screen brightness for comfort and get up to 14 hours on a single charge. It hardly uses any battery on standby. I can pick it up two days later and the battery will have drained only 1-2%.

Pixel Density: Booklovers are already in on the Nook's secret. The screen resolution of 1400x900 at 243 pixels per inch is ideal for – you guessed it – reading. This means much less eye strain if you spend hours pouring over ebooks and documents. Text and images render beautifully crisp and clear. For comparison, 250ppi is the benchmark for the "retina" display that you pay for with Apple and the eye can't make out more detail beyond that point. 243ppi bests the comparable tablets in its price range like the Samsung Galaxy Tab 7", Google Nexus 7" (2012) and even the Kindle Fire HD 7", its most direct competitor as an eReader turned tablet. This alone was a major reason why I chose the Nook HD and it does not disappoint.


Look and Feel


Rating: 4 out of 5

Nook HD 7" in Smoke (photo: techradar.com)

The Nook HD measures 7.7"x 5.0" x 0.43". The screen is the same size as other comparable 7-inch tablets, but it can give the impression that it is smaller/narrower due to the noticeably wider bezel. The aesthetic impact is debatable, but I actually prefer a wide, grippable bezel so you can hold the device comfortably without getting your fingers all over the screen. The fact that the frame is plastic gives it a somewhat cheaper look, but it also allows the tablet to weigh in at a mere 300g, which is a fair trade-off for me. Plus, the plastic is reminiscent of the portable devices of yesteryear that were markedly more durable against everyday wear.

Overall, the device resists fingerprints fairly well. It also has a really comfortable soft-touch rubber backing that feels very stable in the hand and is completely the opposite of the cheaper appearance of the front. More bothersome is the build quality of the buttons and the sd card slot. The volume and power buttons and SD card slot protector are a cheap, clicky plastic which is shiny unlike the matte finish of the rest of the body, almost like an afterthought. The card slot protector feels extremely flimsy. Most of the superficial flaws can largely be mitigated by the various protective accessories (cases, skins, folio covers, etc) available, but if the card slot breaks off, you're pretty much stuck getting dust inside.

Nook HD power button and SD card slot. Photos: techradar.com

Another very obvious shortcoming for the Nook HD when compared with, say, the Kindle Fire HD, is that there is no front- or rear-facing camera. No camera at all. I would have liked to see a front camera at least for the occasional Skype chat, but it's not that big a deal for me personally. However, because there is no camera, not all Android apps are supported, including Skype and anything that requires photos/videos or scanning.


Quality Control/Unboxing


Rating: 2 out of 5

If slight build issues were the only thing to contend with, this would be a near-perfect device at such a low pricepoint. Unfortunately, one major flaw with the Nook HD is that there appears to be a real problem with Barnes & Noble's quality control. I had store credit available, so I purchased my Nook from my local Best Buy. When I brought it home and opened the sealed box, the device was in terrible shape. Although it shipped factory packed in protective plastic, this plastic sleeve and the tablet inside were both covered in heavy smudges and clearly marked with fingerprints. That shouldn't happen with a new device.

Unboxing. Photo by author.

I assumed that I was given a refurbished or open box item and went back to Best Buy for an exchange. This time, I opened Box #2 in front of a sales associate. They were surprised to find that the device inside was also covered in oily smudges. They insisted that they never open products from the factory or re-shrink wrap them, so the source of the problem had to be Barnes & Noble. I was skeptical, but called B&N to find out more. They had never heard of devices shipping in bad condition. I doubt that; but regardless, I did what most people on the Internet do and blamed Best Buy. With my return partially in store credit, I then travelled to 2 more Best Buy locations and opened 3 more Nook HD boxes in front of store managers. All had some kind of damage. In one store, the manager even tried to clean the smudges off the screen, but they wouldn't come off. In another, the bezel was broken and loose from the screen. It became clear that something was seriously wrong with the poor quality devices from B&N. Before giving up, I made a last ditch effort to order from the Best Buy website. It arrived with out any trace of smudge or mark on the screen. Success! However, the inner plastic tray that holds the device was cracked at the corner. And so there was a matching tiny gouge in the plastic bezel near the headphone jack.

Best Buy couldn't get away without the blame this time, as the geniuses packed the item like this:

Quality packaging skills from the geniuses at Best Buy. Photo by author.

The accordion-shaped crush pattern on the box is, I assume, courtesy of UPS. It's nice when companies work together to give you great service.

The screen was flawless and it booted up, so I kept it instead of making a fourth return which would cost me more in gas than the device itself. This is pretty abysmal quality control and prevents me from rating the Nook HD higher than 3.5 stars. That's without even turning it on and thus negates many of its admittedly positive attributes. As an aside, Best Buy was extremely accommodating with my request to keep opening and discarding Nooks free of charge, whereas B&N customer service is pretty useless. When I reported the units damaged, they could only offer a refurbished device as a replacement and also proceeded to deny that their products leave the factory in bad shape. A quick check of YouTube unboxing videos shows their smudges are common.



Functionality and Usability


Rating: 3 out of 5


Although the software might seem a little clunky (sometimes a lot of actions are required to arrive at a simple task), I actually find it reasonably intuitive. The fact that it's aimed at a wide audience, and with Nook's paired-down focus on reading, means that it's simple to use and learn how to navigate. Opening files is extremely fast, scrolls well and is very comfortable. As mentioned above, access to the Google Play store means that the old complaints about restricted operating software are rather moot for most users. Out of the box, the interface is fairly customizable, with personalized lock screens and wallpapers, widgets, recent documents carousel and sliding desktop screens for categorizing icons. It's certainly nice to look at, if not the most functional if you're in a hurry. There are interface apps you can download to tweak the appearance without rooting. The modified Nook version of Android includes a Nook Today screen which basically tries to sell you eBooks based on your interests (okay concept, but I wish I could add other retailers to that screen. Sorry, B&N, you're too expensive). It also supports multiple user accounts and parental controls, neither of which I make any use of.

The library menu is pre-organized into categories or shelves by Nook that you can't change, including Books, Documents, Magazines, Catalogs, etc. Anything you put into these folders on the device or the matching folders on your SD card will show up there, with the exception of the Documents folder (I can't fathom why). As a result, all books and journal articles stored on the SD card must go into Books if they are going to show up on the device. But then they show in one massive list that is cumbersome to sort. That's irritating. You can create new "shelves" (also cumbersome because they get hidden under "My Shelves"), but not get rid of the default ones. If you buy a magazine from the Nook store that B&N misclassifies as a "Book", you can't move it between shelves to rectify the problem and customer support couldn't care less.

Similarly, you can install new apps, but can never get rid of the ones that come pre-installed (like Hulu Plus, Facebook and Pandora). Even if you click "uninstall" or use a file manager app to force it to uninstall, the next time you put your wifi on, they'll download again. A workaround is to hide the offending apps from your user profile. The same applies to books that you've purchased from Nook. If you want to archive them to the cloud, you have to do so from the B&N website or they'll keep coming back even after you try to hide them. The software is full of little annoyances such as these, but, in general, nothing too major. A custom launcher or file manager app can be an instant remedy to most organizational issues, so it's not worth getting too hung up on the interface.


On the plus side, Nook's native reader application is actually very good. It's light, fast and sleek, supports a wide range of file types, and is easy to use. For regular eBooks (ePubs) the Nook Reader app is as good as any alternative from the Play store. For catalogs, magazines and graphic novels, the Zoom View feature automatically adjusts the page turns to take you to the next relevant section or block of the page while making the best use of the screen real estate. You can also read PDF files in the native Reader app, but I recommend a third party PDF reader for the kind of intensive reading, annotating, editing and highlighting that students and researchers are often engaged in. I'll write up another review for the best Android apps for academics soon where I will go through the various PDF readers, but the app market has quite a few to choose from. From the ones I've tried on the Nook thus far, note-taking, highlighting and annotating functions really well, attesting to adequate screen sensitivity. In short, with a PDF reader installed, the Nook HD becomes an ideal device to read/download academic content.

Another B&N perk is that you can get free wifi at any B&N location. Plus, while you're in store, you can read any books you want for up to an hour. If you have a nice B&N nearby or on campus that can be useful, even if only for reading new bestsellers or novels for free over a series of visits. The Overdrive app also works on Nook, giving you access to eBook loans from your local public library and any participating university libraries.

99% Error


The software is easy enough to get used to with next to no learning curve. Sadly, I encountered a serious glitch that is now impossible to overlook and has long-term affects on usability. I'm referring to it here as the "99% error" and together with B&N's failed quality control, it forces me to cap my overall rating at no more than 3.5 stars. Basically, randomly and for unknown reasons, the Nook freezes during boot-up. Reports from user forum discussions indicate that some sources of the freeze include following a software update or after modifying user accounts, or, in my case, after the unlock screen froze and I had to reboot the device. Instead of fully booting, the screen locks at 99% loading and never loads the interface. The battery would simply drain if you let it keep "loading". The next time you charge it and turn it on, it would again only get to 99%. There are various suggested remedies to fix this, but a hard reset to factory settings is the only thing that really works.

Having to hard reset a device happens from time to time and is not that big a deal. What is a big deal is when you can't actually access the device to back up your files before doing so and there's really no way to tell if or when it's going to happen. This is where I have trouble recommending the Nook if you tend to gather a lot of local files like notes, images and annotations. Apart from the SD card, anything stored to the device memory and not in some cloud service (apps and most app data in Google Play are safe) will be wiped in the event your Nook freezes and needs to be factory reset. This makes regular backups of any data on the drive an absolute must.

However, even more annoying is that if you have made any notes or highlights in your eBooks using Nook's native Reader app, this data cannot be backed up anywhere. You can't even export highlights/notes at regular intervals for your own data preservation. Unlike Amazon Kindle's whispersync service, even your Nook books purchased from B&N will lose their bookmarks, notes, highlights and annotations. The workaround is using a third party app that allows exports (I have not found one that will do this automatically). Even then, all you will have is a separate file with a list of highlights and annotations. You can't import them back into the book's text again. You'll also need a file manager to move any exported files to your SD card from the Nook's internal memory, and that's something novices will probably struggle with. Some apps put files in places on the Nook that appear to fall haphazardly into the My Files category. Making sense of where everything is stored to get your backups right will get more confusing as time goes on and more of the space is used up. It's kind of a mess.

The potential to lose all data stored to the internal memory means that it's safer to keep all documents on the SD card except for app data. This should irritate anyone who, like myself, paid extra for 16GB onboard storage ... but at least I have plenty of space for apps?


Conclusion


Overall Rating: 3.5 out of 5

I would absolutely recommend this device as an eReader (with the caveat that even though the Nook Reader app is great, you'll want to install one that allows some kind of backup if you like to keep your reading notes). I am also confident in recommending it for academic users, because of the availability of quality productivity apps from Google Play and the overall comfort of reading and making notes even with the limited screen size. The battery lasts for up to 14 hours of reading with the screen reasonably bright (the high pixel density means little to no eye fatigue). The screen is also highly responsive. The build makes it lightweight, portable and comfortable to hold. If the software were more stable and the quality control more reliable, this could be a 5 star device. That said, updates are still being released, so there may be a patch for any lingering issues in the future (fingers crossed).


Fetch Eyewear Review


About this review

Fetch Eyewear is the latest in my review series of online eyeglass retailers focusing on predominately online stores that offer a limited range of designer frames, at-home trials, a risk-free returns policy, free shipping both ways and charitable programs, all at a price point of around $100 (or $125 for high indexes). I'm not out to find the cheapest possible glasses, but the best value for money and most safe/reliable companies to buy from. You can view the full series of reviews to date here. Fetch kindly opted to take part in this series by providing me with a pair of high index sunglasses, making them the seventh company that I have reviewed since I first started shopping for glasses online last year.


[Update 10 April 2013] My Eyefly sunglasses broke! Scroll down for more info.

In my last post, I detailed why polarized sunglasses are great for everyday use and to protect your eyes from harsh glare, but less than optimal for outdoor photography and/or using any devices with an LCD screen like digital cameras, tablets, smartphones, laptops, etc. To recap, lens polarization causes LCD screens to black out at certain angles depending on the manufacturer, so you can't always see what is displayed on the screen. However, there is a solution for photographers and tech geeks: tinted, not polarized, lenses.

I take plenty of photos as a hobby and an ethnographer and spend a lot of time using LCD devices, so I have been on the lookout for an alternative to polarized lenses that will still shade my eyes and enable me to see what I'm doing on sunny days. Not too much to ask, right? Well, previous "designer" sunglasses have cost me up to $700 choosing from the cheapest styles available in my prescription. Those plastic sunglass clips from the drugstore never work for me. Luckily, the past couple of years has seen the state of the glasses market revolutionized by a new set of online retailers offering quality, reasonably priced eyewear to the masses.

After browsing a few sites, I was excited when I learned that Eyefly.com, whose glasses cost only $99 $94 [Update 04/2013: price reduction!] including lenses ($124 for high index prescriptions), offer non-polarized tinted lenses with "a neutral gray or brown tint" and UV protection. I visited Eyefly's website when I received a request for my thoughts about the company after the publication of my series How to buy glasses online. I immediately loved their selection of frames (more on that below). And I am now pleased to be able to add Eyefly to my comprehensive review of high index eyeglasses in the $100 price range.

I'll begin with a little information about the company and a brief overview of the website shopping experience, so scroll down if you want to skip right to the glasses.

A few months ago, I embarked on a series of posts reviewing online retailers of high index (read: strong) prescription eyeglasses. The result was an unexpectedly detailed 5-part comparison review called How to buy glasses online. Although the posts were not especially anthropological in content, all 5 parts of the series are now in the top 10 most popular of all time on this blog.

In the course of reviewing what is generally seen as a specialist item, I became aware that many of the needs I had for eyewear were common with other academics (a lot of us need corrective lenses... due to all that reading/writing and staring at our screens?). I also realized that key factors in my search for adequate and reasonably priced eyewear connected with my experiences as a field researcher. That got me thinking about essential field gear for anthropologists and how I never considered putting glasses on the list. I begin this review by addressing this common oversight (no pun intended).

Whatever the vision needs, including contact lenses or non-Rx sunglasses, eyewear and eye care should be factored into the anthropologist's field preparation. For ethnographers working in less-than-ideal conditions far away from eye care professionals, or in my case, on a tight budget with no insurance, glasses are an essential, yet easily overlooked component of the field kit. What if your lenses break and there is no local optician to replace them? The first good advice is to have a couple of spare pairs, which is something my how-to on buying discounted eyewear online can help you with. (If you can afford several spare pairs of high index glasses without bargain hunting online, might I direct you to my coffee donation button at the top of the page?) As it happens, when I was in the field, I did not have spares and I could not afford the optician's prices while I was there. Having always purchased glasses from opticians, I wasn't even aware at the time that I could order glasses online and probably could have saved myself a lot of money and eyestrain had this been an option.

Back to Anthropology

Product Reviews?

Regular readers of this blog may have been wondering about my brief foray into eyeglass reviews, like what it had to do with anthropology or academia or ethnography or any of the other usual content I post here. In fact, I have written product reviews on this blog before (see 'Product Reviews' tab above), mostly on hardware and software. There are two main reasons why I write online consumer reviews and how-tos. Firstly, I like being able to produce something useful that will draw in a wider audience, especially if I have had trouble finding something suitable or comprehensive on a topic myself.

Back when I was a PhD student, I often lamented the lack of practical hardware and software reviews for stuff I could actually afford (which wasn't much), so I gravitated towards reviewing free and open source software or hacks and workarounds to make basic computers/browsers more productive. My own field kit was mixed bag of old technology put to new uses. Rather than buying a bunch of premium and proprietary software, I immersed myself in the belief that there is almost certainly a free/low-cost way to do most tasks using one or a combination of open source or gratis software/web-based applications. The learning curve is steep, but worth it when you can't afford more. That's more or less how I got on to tech reviews and how-tos in the first place.

In a similar vein, I still notice a lack of academic-oriented reviews for products and services, especially cross-over consumer items like tablets, digital recording devices, clothing or field gear. I had trouble finding a decent academic review of the Kindle DX graphite, for instance. Most of my reading is qualitative where extensive note-taking and highlights are imperative, but other academic styles of working are very different. Plus, anthropologists need to know what's going to work for them in the field as well as the office (or lack thereof).

I was sure that I had bored readers to death with eyewear reviews, but actually my 5-post series on glasses has become the most popular on this blog to date. I'm pretty confident that they've helped people to save a lot of time, energy and money. I intend future reviews to be of more direct interest to academics, anthropologists, students, geeks or social researchers, but not exclusively. My next planned review will also be of an optical nature, but with fieldworkers in mind.

Secondly, I am working on some new research to do with media and consumerism, so consider the product reviews that appear here as a minor form of participant observation. Details will follow in the future, but there are more pressing things on my agenda at the moment. Just to be clear: I will never post pre-written "sponsored" reviews (read: robot spam) to get ad revenues and won't ever post anything that I haven't written myself and don't honestly believe. I'll also clearly state when I've been given a complimentary product sample to review.


A brief Urban Firewalls update (finally)

I designated October as my month to return to my PhD thesis to prepare it for publication. Given my highly unstable personal circumstances at present (not to mention ending the month with Hurricane Sandy and a prolonged blackout), I am actually impressed that I managed to start getting down to work. I am currently drafting a plan for the new book version which includes re-working the chapter layout and refining the ethnographic contributions, potentially adding some comparative case studies from outside of Spain, and more original material that did not appear in the PhD version. The PhD manuscript as it stands presents a detailed story about a small Catalan town and its highly localized responses to technological and urban change. By re-organizing the contents, I hope to enable the local data to interweave with a more universal story of humans and technology and contribute to a more comprehensive anthropology of the digital age. I have a new website where I'll post updates of the progress of Urban Firewalls.


New at the OAC

There have also been quite a few items of interest over at the Open Anthropology Cooperative recently. We started shaking off the back-to-school malaise with a new e-seminar and some great blog posts. In case you missed it, catch up on the seminar for "In and Out of the State" by Patience Kabamba. In his featured blog, John McCreery asks, what about society and culture have changed to make being a dick the road to failure instead of the key to success? I am surprised that no one has yet provided any ethnographic studies of bullying in the forum, but this is a question I will be returning to shortly in an upcoming blog post. The US presidential elections inspired this post about language and politics and this follow-up blog on election lessons learned. Speaking of openness, why don't anthropologists share what they know about households with economists?

Despite this fairly steady stream of new and interesting additions to the site, the subject of "stagnation" in our forums has surfaced yet again, leading us to re-question the state of affairs over at the OAC under the header The Rise and Fall of Social Networks. If you are interested in the politics of making a site like the OAC work and some of the ongoing obstacles we are facing, please join in the discussion. My response to that thread will give you an idea of where I stand on a number of issues as well as a hint at what I'm working on for the future of the OAC:

Some good points in this article, at least for thinking about a historiography of social networking sites. But then there are significant differences between social networks and academic networks, much of which have to do with return on time investment, volunteer labor and long-term objectives, not to mention power relations and status hierarchies that carry over from the academic world. Much of activity on the social web need not concern itself with aims, intentions or long-term goals. It's easy. It can keep ticking over until boredom or newness - whichever comes first - force change. Academic networks don't work exactly the same way. The OAC mixes both together, which may contribute to an identity crisis of sorts.

I don't agree with all the points made in the article about Facebook vs. Twitter. I actually think that Twitter is, on the whole, more active and powerful than Facebook. Facebook's modus operandi is outdated, the layout and structure muddled, its features are restrictive and its policies are confusing. Sure, for most users, a lot of this is irrelevant. Even Apple can convince people its products are inherently usable, which is patently untrue. Yet both of these companies are successful by closing off their markets and thereby normalizing clumsy technology and unintuitive interfaces. Twitter not so much. But I digress ...

There are probably more dead blogs on the internet than active ones. There are at least 83 million fake, unused or inactive Facebook accounts. I have emails that lapsed into oblivion over the years, websites that expired, and domains I never renewed. Is there any technology online that is not subject to simply running its course? This post, Why Are There So Many Dead Blogs, does a pretty good job of noting all the simple human factors involved. It's not only the technology that determines what network lives or dies.

Playing around on Twitter and/or keeping in touch with family on Facebook are not analogous to activity at the OAC. The first is fleeting and impermanent. The second is personal and intimate. The latter takes more time commitment, at least some critical thought, and the expectation of some kind of pointed exchange or response over time. We've tried to add site features that lower the barrier to participation (share buttons, twitter tab, RSS), but the returns on this are also quite low. The content that is uploaded without the requirement of reciprocity or response (e.g. "sharing a video", "liking" something, "listing an event"), is really incidental to any wider successes here, or so it would seem.

The more significant products of the OAC's concerted efforts - namely the Press - require investments of time and energy. They attract participants because they fit longstanding academic value models. Academics change slowly even if we'd like to think that new modes of communication make a qualitative difference to how we live and work. Hence why email has not imploded as the means for transmitting academic information. Mailing lists are still popular because they are semi-closed/private and simple. They do one useful thing well enough to stick around. In early OAC days, Twitter was a big deal for us: a real paradigm shift that led to the OAC's development in the first place. Today, no one seems that bothered to engage on Twitter. Perhaps that is a failure on our part as far as implementation, but it is more likely that Twitter no longer fills a communicative need for the OAC since circumstances have changed. The OAC Facebook page is now a bit more active, but still pretty separate from the main network.

We have had continual debates about what the site hopes to achieve or "do" - a mission statement - that would attract participants and be meaningful. Yet no one seems willing to take on a more permanent role in shaping the site. If the OAC is imploding, what's the precise cause and remedy other than lack of dedicated interest?

I have concentrated a lot on technical development at the OAC and I still believe that a deluge of content is preventing more adequate use and navigation of the site. I do agree with John that we need to streamline access to the most interesting content and like the idea of running a "best of" series that resurrects old posts to keep them alive. Instead of pushing for some "new" spark, we are likely not making best use of what we already have. I wish Ning made it easier to index and display old posts. I have sketches/ideas for site changes, but I am scrambling to keep on top of things at the moment. We don't have as strong a development team as we once did among the admins, and it really can't be done without wider interest.


We have been talking about these issues at the OAC in some form or another since the site's speedy launch in 2009. I am now committed to taking more drastic efforts to put an end to pervasive content-navigation woes in the hopes that related participation woes will also disappear. A few weeks ago, I began experimenting with site improvements for revamping the OAC's appearance, perhaps better termed "image". The OAC homepage hosted on Ning has been both a source of the OAC's successes as an academic/social network and a frustrating infrastructural barrier to expansion. I am working on some bold ideas that would involve making more dramatic changes beyond Ning. If the experimentation starts to look like an actual possibility, I will float the new ideas on-site for feedback. As I mentioned in the post above, any lasting effort cannot really be forged without wider community interest. If you can help in any way to make the Open Anthropology Cooperative a more effective, active and useful site for anthropologists to accomplish meaningful things, please volunteer your skills.


New to anthropology: PopAnth

The launch of PopAnth in September marks an exciting move forward for anthropology online. PopAnth presents snapshots of anthropological knowledge for popular audiences in online magazine format. It was formed out of a discussion about public anthropology over at the OAC. The team, including some OAC veterans, has really embraced the idea of opening anthropology and making it more publicly engaging. The articles are fun to read and really distill worthwhile talking points about what anthropology is and what it hopes to discover about people. Greg Downey over at Neuroanthropology sums up the motivation and intentions behind PopAnth, including samples of recently submitted articles and how to get involved.




Image from hongkiat.com

This is Part 5 of my multipart review How to buy glasses online. I have already posted my reviews of DB Vision, Warby Parker and Glasses.com. This recap and summary is my final post which completes the series.


So far I have introduced the predicament of buying glasses with high index lenses in a monopolized glasses market, and reviewed my online shopping experience at three web-based optical retailers: DB Vision, Warby Parker and Glasses.com. Along the way I have attempted to provide objective reviews of these retailers based on my personal experiences as well as advice for anyone considering buying high index glasses online.

Review summary

For this post, I intended to rank my three purchases and pick my standout favorite. That turned out to be more difficult than I thought. Instead, I'll finish with a brief summary and the pros and cons of each pair. This will supplement my earlier reviews now that I have had the time to wear each pair for a longer period.

How to buy glasses online (Part 4): DB Vision

This is Part 4 of my multipart review How to buy glasses online. I have already posted my review of Warby Parker and Glasses.com. This is the third and final review to complete my comparison, and will be followed by a recap and summary post in Part 5.

DB Digital Balance – DBVision.com

Each of the companies reviewed in this series stand out from the crowd for one reason or another: Glasses.com for its branding and designer frames. Warby Parker for its soaring popularity and media coverage. DB Vision also caught my eye for some exceptional reasons. It is probably the most unique in terms of the product (digital lenses) and shopping experience (online or via kiosk in select locations). DB may be the least well-known, but hopefully this review will change that.

How to buy glasses online (Part 2): Glasses.com

This is the second part of a multipart review series, How To Buy Glasses Online. If you haven't read Part 1, you should start here.

Glasses.com

Glasses.com (1-800-Glasses) is run by the same people as 1-800-Contacts. This is pretty much a household name in contact lenses, so I felt fairly confident wading into online glasses buying with this company. Before I begin, I want to just make it clear that Glasses.com is not compensating me in any way for writing this review. I have noticed that most other reviews around the web are "sponsored", and they are pretty useless because of it. A sponsored review is like a sponsored politician!


I'm about to say something nice about Windows

(This post is about 9 months old and has been sitting in draft. It made me laugh to read it again, so I’m posting it now).




Turn off all the excessive babysitter prompts ("are you sure you want to allow this?"), forget the hefty footprint (standard HDD sizes on new machines size can take it), and the one feature of Windows 7 which makes it my new best friend: improved file search.

Finally coming out of the dark ages and catching up with Spotlight for file indexing and searching, the lightening fast full-text search means that regardless of whatever quirky way I've decided to organize my multitude of academic files, articles, books, notes, fieldnotes, web junk and miscellaneous accumulation of unsorted mess, I can find it in a few keystrokes. I can even get it to trawl my Zotero database along with my other files. Academics, rejoice. And whatever you do, don't listen to the advice telling you to disable the file indexing system to save resources and speed up the OS. Slim down everything else, but not this.

What makes Win 7 file search worth blogging about is that all I'm really dependent upon to get my PhD done efficiently is a word processor and a browser. I didn't have any fieldnote software like NVivo when I was in the field, so all my files are in separate Word and Excel docs, in Zotero, zip archives or simply photo and video files. My folder tree is fairly logical, but my PDFs, articles, books and resources are scattered across folders corresponding to 8 years of Higher Education and hundreds of subject headers. More file creation and management software never helped. In fact, I discovered a long time ago that I don’t need or want more software to manage it all. That just produces an even more fragmented mess plus ties me in to costly proprietary software. All I need is a good search system.

Congrats, Microsoft. You've made your first improvement since Windows 3.1 (I still have a copy; too bad it won’t dual boot). I'm impressed.

Windows 3.1
There are many other aspects of Win 7 to rate. Not all would receive such a glowing review, but I work faster and more efficiently than I did before, which is better than a poke in the eye (read: Vista).


On June 17th, I attended the PGRA 2010 Conference at Canterbury Christ Church University (PowerPoint after the jump; see previous posts for details on the paper I presented). The 9th annual postgraduate research conference sought to bring together researchers from different disciplines to discuss their experiences united under the theme, “The Adventure of Research: Is Research Enough of an Adventure?” The openness of the topic meant for an invigoratingly diverse series of panels devoted to all aspects of postgraduate research. Graduate students and organizers Baptiste Moniez and Tammy Dempster of CCCU did a very commendable job in constructing a brilliant full-day conference packed with information and discussion.

Some background notes: I have been at the University of Kent, which sits on a sprawling green campus atop a hill on the outskirts of the city of Canterbury, since 2002. The city’s other major educational establishment, Canterbury Christ Church University, has its main, compact campus closer to the city center in addition to newly acquired premises around Canterbury. It is natural that there remains some level of competition between Kent and CCCU in Canterbury. They may share a city, but, from my experience, they are much like two different worlds. I might even go as far as to suggest that the University of Kent peers down from its lofty hilltop at the city center university with some level of snobbery. In 8 years, this was sadly my first time at an event on the CCCU campus.

One notable feeling that I took away from the conference was a genuine sense of researcher community – especially across departments – that I have rarely witnessed at Kent. Perhaps this is because CCCU is considerably smaller, with fewer departments overall, so that the research students are likely to work in close proximity and with similar members of staff. There was an impressive and cohesive sense of a graduate/postgraduate entity. Kent’s recent addition of an American-style Grad School has some catching up to do. I also got the impression that, despite challenges along the way, everyone at CCCU really enjoyed their work, their colleagues and had strong relationships with members of staff. Many of the students had returned to higher education from various walks of life or from the sheer desire to “start anew”, which makes for refreshing perspectives sourced by lifelong learning.

In addition to the friendly atmosphere of the conference, it was also carefully planned. There were three sessions in the day, with three to four parallel panels per session and three presenters per panel, grouped into themes. So, for each hour, attendees could choose 3 of a possible 12 presentations to view. Unfortunately, this meant that you had to miss more than you actually saw, but that is the trade-off for other benefits of a single-day conference with plenty of presenters. Most of the attendees were from CCCU (hence the comfortable, “local” feel), but others were from Kent (like myself), Brighton and Brazil.

It was a relaxed day and the contributors and other attendees were genuinely interested to share each other's research and life stories. As one person in a morning session commented, some presentations were like “therapy for PhD students”, whereas others (including mine) were about more specific research projects, how they had developed and what they had learned. The most useful aspect for me was hearing from researchers in other disciplines. I also believe that the conference theme “The Adventure of Research” made for particularly engaging contributions.

I missed the earliest panels, but arrived in time for the second and third sessions. Here’s a brief synopsis of highlights from my day.

The first panel I attended consisted of three presentations offering interesting analogies for the PhD process: comparing it to a journey on a ship (Baptiste Moniez, CCCU), a roller coaster (Paul Hudson, CCCU), and various fairy tales (Maria Lehane, CCCU). Each of these presentations was an informative and very personal look at the doctoral research journey from the unique perspectives of three different fields, including two mature students. I could empathize with both the sailing and rollercoaster analogies, although it tends to be my life around the PhD that is full of turbulent seas and winding tracks, while the research process, bureaucracy, student requirements and supervision have been relatively straightforward and even unproblematic. Maybe I’m the odd one out, but I’ve never felt overwhelmed by the pragmatics and practicalities of doing a PhD. It is life and financial matters that get in the way and threaten to sink the ship. Nevertheless, it is always reassuring to speak with other research students about what are usually quite similar experiences. Commiserating on one’s personal failures is a necessary task for a researchers pursuing academic careers.

Immediately after lunch (the free food was excellent, and not just because it was free), was my turn to present. The response was very positive, and I got the impression that my internet research was both a new subject and a new approach for many listeners, which made it extra enjoyable for me. It is a challenge to present discipline-specific methods and topics to an open audience, but it was well-received. The follow-up questions opened up an interesting dialogue about popular media impressions of the internet, how/why to study technology users and non-users, theoretical concerns behind the “real” and the “virtual” dichotomy, and doing anthropological fieldwork.

After my presentation was Fanny Chan (University of Kent) who discussed her research from the very early stages of her PhD in Marketing/Business. Since anthropologists generally find it unfathomable to consider the marketability and earning potential of their research, listening to business students is like entering a world of mystery and wonder. This presentation focused on television advertising in Hong Kong and the UK, both of which have only recently jumped on the product placement bandwagon as pioneered by the mavericks of televised capitalism over in the USA.

The response from the conference audience to this was fascinating. Virtually all the comments came from the perspective that product placement is wrong and research to encourage its spread borders on sinister. Why do we generally find product placement so repugnant, and new legislation allowing it to take place on TV so off-putting?

Maybe because I’m American and my entertainment background was not shaped by ad-free programming and the BBC (save PBS), I’m perplexed by the uproar. To allow product placement in 2009 does not seem like a radical thing to do. At this point, most people are so used to ads on the internet which enable them to acquire free (and sometimes better-than-paid) services. Acknowledging that money makes the world go ‘round, we develop our own built-in visual filters to skim over things like product placement. While I find it fairly easy to ignore in most American programs, the short clip that Fanny showed from a local HK program was strikingly different. Actors emphatically waved around branded soft drink bottles and rustled a brightly-colored bag of snacks while ecstatically munching on its contents. Are there culture-specific thresholds for this kind of advertising?

Suren Raghavan (Politics/IR, University of Kent) closed the session with his presentation on Sri Lankan politics, religion and violence. Interestingly, he spoke of Political Anthropology – not the “anthropology of politics” as I have come to know it, but as the “politics of anthropology” – and its ramifications for the people who are represented in anthropological work. In face of some of the inadvertent (sometimes negative) impacts that anthropologists can have on the people and places they encounter, Suren calls for re-evaluating the received wisdom from oriental anthropology with regard to Sri Lanka. In particularly, he seemed to emphasize that anthropologists in this area have not adequately perceived the “contexts” of localized politics and have thereby unwittingly fed into ongoing conflicts. Instead, he argues, more attention should be paid to primordial identities. Suren admits that several of his assertions were made to provoke the audience; namely, that violence, religion and nationalism are essentially “in the blood” of all Sri Lankans and that Sri Lanka is in a “pre-modern” state of being, not ready for liberal ideals and certainly not able, at this stage, to “progress”, hence the inherently violent nature of its people.

Religion and nationalism are two of the most dangerous byproducts of humanity. Primordialist, religious, ethno-nationalist, yet also informed and persuasive, academics are therefore a frightening prospect. I had to press Suren on the fact that he did not do justice to “his people” (often using the label “we” and “us” to describe his data) in making primordialist claims. He relied heavily on Anthony Smith and dismissed all suggestions of the constructed nature of identity, projecting the idea of nation back in time as an explanatory factor. Suren was a good sport in the face of my criticisms, but I worry about the applications of these perspectives on local politics, of which he is no doubt an expert and in an ideal position to make essential contributions to Sri Lankan issues. Taking a fatalist approach to inevitable violence and an evolutionary approach to social development seems destined to perpetuate the products of what he attributes to a new version of Buddhism that promotes war and delays peace in Sri Lanka. However, I am sure that his perceptions of all sides of these issues run deeper than could be condensed into a short presentation.

Between sessions and after the close of the day, conference attendees had plenty of time to continue their discussions. An after-conference drink might have been nice, too, but I suppose for those who arrived at 9:00, the day was long enough. I met several interesting research students, none of whom were anthropologists. I like my anthro colleagues, but sometimes a change of outlook is refreshing. The research students from Christ Church were engaged, friendly and inviting. I’m not sure I’ve previously used any of these words to describe their equivalents at my own University in the same city. How does that happen? Perhaps CCCU and Kent students should meet half way up the hill from time to time and next year’s conference could be two-day joint venture.


top