Blogs do affect local politics in a profound way, and what is particularly interesting is that people who are politically active online are generally influential to their community in a variety of ways. In fact, a study conducted by the Institute for Politics, Democracy & the Internet showed that 69% of “Online Political Citizens,” or people who are politically active in online forums and discussions are “Influencers.” Influencers are described as opinion leaders and trendsetters among their respective friends and communities. The study also determined that of Online Political Citizens, only 44% of them were involved in politics in traditional ways (like attending rallies, donating money, etc.). Based on a number of qualifying indicators, a RoperASW study showed that Influencers have strong ties to their communities, offer their opinions to the public, and are in positions of local authority. This can explain the influential powers that these citizens have over their local politics (Political Influentials Online in the 2004 Presidential Campaign).
Because those that are politically active online involve themselves in community affairs, it makes sense that they would affect local politics as well. Therefore, people who blog are very likely to have an effect on the politics of their local communities. As Roll Call, a Washington D.C. political newspaper says, “[local political] blogs specialize in state or local political coverage, and while these smaller, non-national political blogs may not have the resources — financial or otherwise — of the well-known titans of the blogosphere, many are starting to gain a following, not to mention the respect of state and local media outlets and politicians” (Blogging Locally, 2005). Not only do such blogs affect the opinions of local citizens, but some of the more well-known and respected blogs may actually be influencing local politicians as well.
A blog local to Buffalo, The Buffalo Pundit (http://buffalopundit.wnymedia.net/blogs/) was created by a local lawyer, Alan Bedenko. He started blogging about politics in September of 2003 at a different location and under a different name (WNY for Wesley Clark, http://wny4clark.blogspot.com/). After Clark left the campaign, he started blogging about local affairs and launched the Buffalo Pundit soon after. The Pundit’s Technorati ranking is 107,824.
This blog is interactive in that there are many people commenting on it about postings, local issues as well as national politics. Bedenko covers a wide range of topics, but it is clear that people have civilized, informed discussions about how their feelings about these issues. Not only do readers seem to enjoy reading the blog posts, but it appears as if the readers are actually involved themselves. The discussions could possibly be the reason that many of the visitors read this blog at all. While the Pundit may not directly affect local politics, it may have an indirect influence in that it gets people debating topics that matter within the community. Perhaps some comments persuade readers by presenting a side that they hadn’t thought about before. Or perhaps people read the Pundit to become involved in local politics that they wouldn’t otherwise know about. There are many indirect affects that interactive blogs can have on a local community’s political activities.
Sources:
1. Bedenko, Alan. The Buffalo Pundit. Retrieved October 24, 2008, from http://buffalopundit.wnymedia.net/blogs/
2. Institute for Politics, Democracy & the Internet (2005). Political Influentials Online in the 2004 Presidential Campaign. Retrieved October 24, 2008, from, http://www.ipdi.org/UploadedFiles/political%20influentials.pdf
3. McArdle, John (2005, April). “Blogging Locally.” The Roll Call. Retrieved October 24, 2008 from, http://www.rollcall.com/issues/50_115/politics/9246-1.html
Friday, October 24, 2008
Thursday, October 9, 2008
Assignment 7: Online Learning
Last semester I took my first online course at UB; it was a public relations class, and the instructor was a professor who was on sabbatical. All of my “lectures” and exams were administered in Blackboard online, and a discussion forum existed where we would post assignments, and have the opportunity to comment on fellow classmates’ work. As a way to account for participation, the instructor noted how often students posted in the discussion forum. While this online format did support discussions, it was a very different communication pattern than a regular class might experience.
For example, our first assignment was to post a press release announcing our enrollment into the course, under the “Discussion Board.” This activity was designed to be an introduction to one another, where we could read about our classmates and ‘get to know each other,’ so to speak. In an online format, getting to know classmates is done very mechanically; students seek out information about other students and then leave comments for them via the discussion board. Responses are delayed and permanently recorded. In an offline class, human interactions are very different; people speak to the group usually as a whole, whereas online communicators generally have to be more direct to make up for a lack of non-verbal cues present in live conversations, like eye contact, for example. Also, it is much easier for the instructor to calculate participation grades as students’ online interactions are recorded permanently; the instructor can count at the end of the semester exactly how many times students commented in the discussion forum. Research shows that student learning in internet-mediated courses is related to the quantity and quality of postings in online discussions, and also the value that the instructor places on this type of interaction (Jiang & Ting, 2000). For this reason, I think that online discussion forums are critical for developing a sense of community in distance learning.
According to John Reid, Coordinator of Distance Education Technology at Kennesaw State University, “virtual education” can be defined as, “the study of credit and non credit courses from world-wide remote sites that are neither bound by time or physical location.” Reid says, “A big part of computer-mediated education is making the student more responsible for self-learning. Instructors in the online environment facilitate, leaving the student to find their own way. Some students like the idea of having an instructor meeting and leading class discussion with them at a regular time. In the virtual classroom students and instructors come and go at all hours. Some learners are sure to discover that this form of communication is difficult for them. How well they do at learning on their own will have a significant bearing on performance.”
I agree with Reid in that a student’s success in an online course depends on how much responsibility they take for their own learning. I remember it being difficult to remember to check the UB Learns Web site to be sure I caught any posted updates. In a traditional course, students would theoretically meet multiple times per week to receive any updates about the course—this lack of regular meetings makes it easier to disconnect from the class, and as a result miss assignments.
The ability to hear a lecture and ask the professor questions was something I missed when taking my online class. Another factor that affects students’ performance in distance learning is their learning style. Distance learning is great for some students because they don’t need to be sitting in class to grasp the material. I found that by just reading the notes posted online by the instructor, I was not able to comprehend the materials as well as I do when I hear the lecture, and see examples. I was also uncomfortable not knowing anyone in the class that I could ask questions about the homework to; I realized after taking this course how much I rely on my fellow students for clarifications and feedback. I think it’s important to have interactions with classmates about material as it seems to be an important part of learning.
Sources:
1. Swan, Karen. 2004. Relationships between Interactions and Learning in Online Environments. Kent State University: The Sloan Consortium.
2. Reid, J. E. What Every Student Should Know About Online Learning. Retrieved October 9, 2008, from University of Illinois, Illinois Online Network Web site: http://www.ion.illinois.edu/Resources/tutorials/overview/reid.html
For example, our first assignment was to post a press release announcing our enrollment into the course, under the “Discussion Board.” This activity was designed to be an introduction to one another, where we could read about our classmates and ‘get to know each other,’ so to speak. In an online format, getting to know classmates is done very mechanically; students seek out information about other students and then leave comments for them via the discussion board. Responses are delayed and permanently recorded. In an offline class, human interactions are very different; people speak to the group usually as a whole, whereas online communicators generally have to be more direct to make up for a lack of non-verbal cues present in live conversations, like eye contact, for example. Also, it is much easier for the instructor to calculate participation grades as students’ online interactions are recorded permanently; the instructor can count at the end of the semester exactly how many times students commented in the discussion forum. Research shows that student learning in internet-mediated courses is related to the quantity and quality of postings in online discussions, and also the value that the instructor places on this type of interaction (Jiang & Ting, 2000). For this reason, I think that online discussion forums are critical for developing a sense of community in distance learning.
According to John Reid, Coordinator of Distance Education Technology at Kennesaw State University, “virtual education” can be defined as, “the study of credit and non credit courses from world-wide remote sites that are neither bound by time or physical location.” Reid says, “A big part of computer-mediated education is making the student more responsible for self-learning. Instructors in the online environment facilitate, leaving the student to find their own way. Some students like the idea of having an instructor meeting and leading class discussion with them at a regular time. In the virtual classroom students and instructors come and go at all hours. Some learners are sure to discover that this form of communication is difficult for them. How well they do at learning on their own will have a significant bearing on performance.”
I agree with Reid in that a student’s success in an online course depends on how much responsibility they take for their own learning. I remember it being difficult to remember to check the UB Learns Web site to be sure I caught any posted updates. In a traditional course, students would theoretically meet multiple times per week to receive any updates about the course—this lack of regular meetings makes it easier to disconnect from the class, and as a result miss assignments.
The ability to hear a lecture and ask the professor questions was something I missed when taking my online class. Another factor that affects students’ performance in distance learning is their learning style. Distance learning is great for some students because they don’t need to be sitting in class to grasp the material. I found that by just reading the notes posted online by the instructor, I was not able to comprehend the materials as well as I do when I hear the lecture, and see examples. I was also uncomfortable not knowing anyone in the class that I could ask questions about the homework to; I realized after taking this course how much I rely on my fellow students for clarifications and feedback. I think it’s important to have interactions with classmates about material as it seems to be an important part of learning.
Sources:
1. Swan, Karen. 2004. Relationships between Interactions and Learning in Online Environments. Kent State University: The Sloan Consortium.
2. Reid, J. E. What Every Student Should Know About Online Learning. Retrieved October 9, 2008, from University of Illinois, Illinois Online Network Web site: http://www.ion.illinois.edu/Resources/tutorials/overview/reid.html
Thursday, October 2, 2008
Blog 6: Identity and AIM
When I was in elementary school and first started exploring the internet I mainly used AOL Instant Messenger. My parents were weary of me communicating with potential strangers via this new technology, but understood that I was interested in talking to my friends online, so allowed me to do so with somewhat close monitoring. They imposed regulations on my screen name choice after hearing that my cousin had chosen a rather provocative name for a 12 year-old: “bikinibabe02”. The rules were that I could not use any part of my name in my screen name, nor was I allowed to use any suggestive language, like that of my cousin’s. After many shot-down requests, I finally settled on “beachball66,” which didn’t give strangers or 10 year-old boys for that matter any images, but still had the word, “beach” in it.
Being that this was my first experience with online identities, I totally ate it up. Kids were judged by the cleverness of their screen names and their online personas formed based on their interactions. Another rule by which I had to abide in order to talk online was the amount of time I spent doing so. I had one hour per day to chat online, which at the time seemed like minutes compared to some of my friends who would never sign off. Those who spent more time online developed a better sense of one another’s online identities. Eventually, the distinctions between people’s online and in-person identities began to corrode. People’s online reputations developed based on a number of different factors: their popularity in school, the name they chose to represent themselves by, the types of interactions they had, and with whom they interacted.
The day that a new online popularity measure was developed became a nightmare for any popularity-conscious pre-teenage girl. AIM Fight measured people’s online popularity by calculating how many different people’s buddy lists an individual was on. In addition, your score would depend on the people’s buddy lists you were on, for three degrees. So, your popularity would be greatly affected by being on the buddy list of a person who was on many other people’s buddy lists, but not affected much by being on an un-popular person’s buddy list. For a better explanation, see http://aimfight.com/whatisaimfight.php. With AIM Fight, my online reputation was no longer only known to me; anyone who knew my screen name could see my popularity score. Obviously, as a competitive pre-teen I became obsessed with checking my ranking against my friends’. Our reputations had been degraded from being formed based on character judgment to being formed by a silly computer-generated popularity-ranking technology.
After the trauma caused by AIM Fight had eventually dissipated, incidents occurred where my friends were getting a hold of each other’s AIM passwords. As many mischievous, curiosity seeking teenagers might do, kids were getting together at one house and posing as another person. All sorts of likely inaccurate information was exchanged, and we used this as a means to finding out all of the latest classroom juice: who was crushing on who, and so forth. The potential reputation damage this behavior could have and probably at times did cause, was extreme. What is astounding is that despite the fact that kids were assuming others’ identities to gossip, we still trusted one another’s online personas. I know that personally, I was more guarded about who I spoke to and what about after I was made aware these activities, but the fact that we all still trusted these identities is unbelievable to me now. We were young, but we had no way of knowing for sure whether or not people were being truthful. I imagine that this is the reason many people trust strangers: they want them to be who they say they are, and there is no way of knowing for sure.
Source:
AIM Fight. (1998). [Graphic representation of three degrees of AIM Fight]. Retrieved from http://aimfight.com/whatisaimfight.php
Being that this was my first experience with online identities, I totally ate it up. Kids were judged by the cleverness of their screen names and their online personas formed based on their interactions. Another rule by which I had to abide in order to talk online was the amount of time I spent doing so. I had one hour per day to chat online, which at the time seemed like minutes compared to some of my friends who would never sign off. Those who spent more time online developed a better sense of one another’s online identities. Eventually, the distinctions between people’s online and in-person identities began to corrode. People’s online reputations developed based on a number of different factors: their popularity in school, the name they chose to represent themselves by, the types of interactions they had, and with whom they interacted.
The day that a new online popularity measure was developed became a nightmare for any popularity-conscious pre-teenage girl. AIM Fight measured people’s online popularity by calculating how many different people’s buddy lists an individual was on. In addition, your score would depend on the people’s buddy lists you were on, for three degrees. So, your popularity would be greatly affected by being on the buddy list of a person who was on many other people’s buddy lists, but not affected much by being on an un-popular person’s buddy list. For a better explanation, see http://aimfight.com/whatisaimfight.php. With AIM Fight, my online reputation was no longer only known to me; anyone who knew my screen name could see my popularity score. Obviously, as a competitive pre-teen I became obsessed with checking my ranking against my friends’. Our reputations had been degraded from being formed based on character judgment to being formed by a silly computer-generated popularity-ranking technology.
After the trauma caused by AIM Fight had eventually dissipated, incidents occurred where my friends were getting a hold of each other’s AIM passwords. As many mischievous, curiosity seeking teenagers might do, kids were getting together at one house and posing as another person. All sorts of likely inaccurate information was exchanged, and we used this as a means to finding out all of the latest classroom juice: who was crushing on who, and so forth. The potential reputation damage this behavior could have and probably at times did cause, was extreme. What is astounding is that despite the fact that kids were assuming others’ identities to gossip, we still trusted one another’s online personas. I know that personally, I was more guarded about who I spoke to and what about after I was made aware these activities, but the fact that we all still trusted these identities is unbelievable to me now. We were young, but we had no way of knowing for sure whether or not people were being truthful. I imagine that this is the reason many people trust strangers: they want them to be who they say they are, and there is no way of knowing for sure.Source:
AIM Fight. (1998). [Graphic representation of three degrees of AIM Fight]. Retrieved from http://aimfight.com/whatisaimfight.php
Friday, September 26, 2008
Assignment 5: Privacy
I think that having internet privacy means that I have complete control over the information that others have about me, via the internet. In an ideally private world, only those who I have granted permission to would have personal details about me. With computers’ abilities to remember information about people, and the ease at which some computers can be hacked into, it is easier than ever to receive unauthorized information about someone.
Http cookies, for example are bits of information that are stored on people’s computers to monitor their browsing habits. While cookies were not originally intended to be used for criminal purposes, they have become useful to those who are trying to find indentifying information about computer users. Users are typically not aware of these cookies tracking their activities on the computer, and then sending personal information back to the cookie’s creator. One way that people can better control things like cookies and phishing is by clearing their internet activity history. This is still not a foolproof method, but luckily many firewalls block cookies from being stored on computers as to prevent the consequences of compromised privacy.
There are many consequences of compromised privacy, some of which can be serious problems. The ultimate fear of most people I imagine is identity theft. If a personal computer with a large amount of data about someone is somehow hacked into, it is most frequently done using the internet. That information can then be dispersed to many others for statistical use, which while it may bother some, is less of a problem than identity theft. If a person receives identifying data about another person through saved information on a computer, their identity could be stolen, which would lead to a long road of complications.
Although identity theft does frighten me, I am more concerned about the information that the government can obtain about citizens. While most people have nothing to hide, being tracked is an uneasy feeling, nevertheless. I know that anything I do on my computer can be monitored by the government, and I don’t believe that should be allowed, unless a person convicted of a serious crime is under investigation.
There are even ways that privacy is breeched that are not nearly as secretive or scandalous as issues such as identity theft via online computer hacking or phishing. As an MSNBC article argues, there are plenty of times that a person’s private information is obtained simply because of their internet activity. Online banking and purchasing are two essentially easy ways of obtaining information about anther. It may not be the neighborhood computer hacker looking through your latest bank statement; it could be someone as “innocent” as your boyfriend browsing your records stored on the computer. This is scary because it goes to show that you never know who has access to your private information when there is so much readily available electronically.
An incident that a friend of mine experienced recently deals with the issue of surveillance. As Wikipedia defines surveillance, this occurs when someone’s behavior is observed from a distance, usually by means of electronic equipment. A friend was in his apartment moving furniture around when he observed a hidden camera behind a chair. Being unaware of how the camera was placed there, or who placed it there, he called the police. The police investigated the situation and discovered many similar instances in the nearby area, but they were still unable to identify the surveyor. This was an uneasy situation for my friend—he felt as if he had been monitored doing private things in his own home, but he didn’t know who and how many people were watching. The camera images were likely streamed over the internet to an observer’s computer. Privacy is important to people, but with the invention of technology, it is being compromised more and more.
Sources:
Internet privacy. (2008, September 25). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 19:36, September 26, 2008, from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Internet_privacy&oldid=241019362
Sullivan, B. (October 10, 2006). Privacy Lost: Does Anyone Care? MSNBC.com. Retrieved from www.msnbc.com
Surveillance. (2008, September 25). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 19:36, September 26, 2008, from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Surveillance&oldid=240844724
Friday, September 12, 2008
Assignment 3: Copyright & DRM
While imposing digital rights management (DRM) regulations upon honest consumers of copyrighted materials is perhaps unfair to paying consumers, it is necessary to prevent illegal uses of copyrighted materials. Drawing a line to allow “honest” users to make duplications of copyrighted materials but disallowing copyright infringers to do the same would be ineffective, and thus decrease creators’ revenues.
Digital rights management is a term that refers to the restrictions enforced upon users of digital media or devices used to play digital media. These restrictions are imposed by law makers, copyright owners, publishers, and manufacturers of the hardware that deciphers the digital media for consumers’ use. The goal of DRM is to control the ways in which people consume copyrighted digital media to protect creators’ rights over their creations for limited amounts of time (Ovalle, 2005). Because the creators of digital media would not make money if everyone had free access to their creations, DRM tries to limit the ease at which unauthorized digital copies are made to prevent the pirating of copyrighted materials.
The conflict is that honest, paying customers have limitations on their consumption of the materials they rightfully paid for. Opponents of DRM argue that once someone has paid for creative digital media (like films, music, etc.) they have the right to use it for personal reasons in whichever way they would like. Opponents also believe that DRM drives competition down because copyrights protect manufacturers from their competitors’ products. Everything from garage door openers to printer cartridges can be copyrighted—which as a result decreases competition in the consumer marketplace and thus drives product costs up (Doctorow, 2004).
DRM proponents are concerned that anyone can claim the “honest” user title even if they are dishonest. It is nearly impossible to draw a line that appropriately punishes those who deserve it, but allow exemption to those who do not. Cory Doctorow, an anti-DRM activist posed a scenario of a mother who purchased a DVD for her children, but in anticipation of the DVD’s destruction, wanted to make a VHS copy for her children to get their sticky fingers all over. Then, when the jelly-smeared VHS was in fact broken, she would still have the original copy for future enjoyment. This mother was an honest consumer, as her copying purposes were for personal use rather than for distributing the copies to her children’s daycare center. When she tried to copy the DVD however, she was not able to due to a restriction imposed by software on the DVD itself as well as hardware inside the DVD player (Doctorow, 2004).
The mother was likely frustrated by her inability to make copies for her children, but imagine the consequences that media creators would face if people were allowed to freely make copies of copyrighted materials. Anybody could make copies from the living room “for their children,” but secretly sell them. This would result in the loss of massive revenue for the creators.
Without the existence of clear regulations, digital media creators could lose control over the distribution of their products. It is necessary to impose physical restrictions like anti-pirating hardware and software upon users to ensure the ethical use of digital media. It is too easy to claim that files are being shared for personal uses, and without physical limitations in place illegal sharing would quickly get out of control, and as a result digital media creators would never receive financial payoff. While it would be nice to trust those who are trustworthy, it would be impossible to distinguish them from the dishonest, so boundaries must be drawn.
Sources:
1. Digital rights management. (2008, September 11). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 16:53, September 12, 2008, from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Digital_rights_management&oldid=237615187
2. Doctorow, C. (2004). Digital Rights Management. Changethis.com, issue 4.03. Retrieved September 12, 2008, from http://changethis.com/4.DRM
3. Ovalle, C. (2005). Information in Cyberspace: Module Five: Introduction to Copyright. Retrieved September 12, 2008, from University of Texas at Austin, School of Information Web site http://sentra.ischool.utexas.edu/%7Ei312co/1.php
Digital rights management is a term that refers to the restrictions enforced upon users of digital media or devices used to play digital media. These restrictions are imposed by law makers, copyright owners, publishers, and manufacturers of the hardware that deciphers the digital media for consumers’ use. The goal of DRM is to control the ways in which people consume copyrighted digital media to protect creators’ rights over their creations for limited amounts of time (Ovalle, 2005). Because the creators of digital media would not make money if everyone had free access to their creations, DRM tries to limit the ease at which unauthorized digital copies are made to prevent the pirating of copyrighted materials.
The conflict is that honest, paying customers have limitations on their consumption of the materials they rightfully paid for. Opponents of DRM argue that once someone has paid for creative digital media (like films, music, etc.) they have the right to use it for personal reasons in whichever way they would like. Opponents also believe that DRM drives competition down because copyrights protect manufacturers from their competitors’ products. Everything from garage door openers to printer cartridges can be copyrighted—which as a result decreases competition in the consumer marketplace and thus drives product costs up (Doctorow, 2004).
DRM proponents are concerned that anyone can claim the “honest” user title even if they are dishonest. It is nearly impossible to draw a line that appropriately punishes those who deserve it, but allow exemption to those who do not. Cory Doctorow, an anti-DRM activist posed a scenario of a mother who purchased a DVD for her children, but in anticipation of the DVD’s destruction, wanted to make a VHS copy for her children to get their sticky fingers all over. Then, when the jelly-smeared VHS was in fact broken, she would still have the original copy for future enjoyment. This mother was an honest consumer, as her copying purposes were for personal use rather than for distributing the copies to her children’s daycare center. When she tried to copy the DVD however, she was not able to due to a restriction imposed by software on the DVD itself as well as hardware inside the DVD player (Doctorow, 2004).
The mother was likely frustrated by her inability to make copies for her children, but imagine the consequences that media creators would face if people were allowed to freely make copies of copyrighted materials. Anybody could make copies from the living room “for their children,” but secretly sell them. This would result in the loss of massive revenue for the creators.
Without the existence of clear regulations, digital media creators could lose control over the distribution of their products. It is necessary to impose physical restrictions like anti-pirating hardware and software upon users to ensure the ethical use of digital media. It is too easy to claim that files are being shared for personal uses, and without physical limitations in place illegal sharing would quickly get out of control, and as a result digital media creators would never receive financial payoff. While it would be nice to trust those who are trustworthy, it would be impossible to distinguish them from the dishonest, so boundaries must be drawn.
Sources:
1. Digital rights management. (2008, September 11). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 16:53, September 12, 2008, from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Digital_rights_management&oldid=237615187
2. Doctorow, C. (2004). Digital Rights Management. Changethis.com, issue 4.03. Retrieved September 12, 2008, from http://changethis.com/4.DRM
3. Ovalle, C. (2005). Information in Cyberspace: Module Five: Introduction to Copyright. Retrieved September 12, 2008, from University of Texas at Austin, School of Information Web site http://sentra.ischool.utexas.edu/%7Ei312co/1.php
Friday, September 5, 2008
COM 125 Assignment 2: Netscape Navigator's Contributions to the History of the Internet
In September of 1994 we were introduced to a web browser that set the stage for future internet browsing advances. Then called Mosaic, what we now know as Netscape Navigator was a significant development in internet history that has molded the ways in which people use the internet today. Originally a mere web browser, Netscape evolved into an internet suite, transforming the internet’s uses and opening the door to competition. The competition between the two major web browsers at the time—Netscape Navigator and Microsoft’s Internet Explorer—drove remarkable internet advances that continue to be built upon today.
While in Beta, Netscape Navigator was called Mosaic after its parent company’s name, Mosaic Communications Corporation, which was renamed Netscape Communications Corporation after a name dispute with a competitor. Netscape Navigator was an immediate success because it was the most advanced browser on the web. Netscape built upon their success by evolving from solely a web browser into an internet suite (initially called Netscape Navigator but now named Netscape Communicator). In addition to having a browsing capacity, Netscape Navigator incorporated a full e-mail client, expanding their web capabilities into an internet suite. This was an important transition in internet history because people gained the ability to do more things on the internet than just browse the web.
In August of 1996, Netscape released version 3.0; around the same time, Microsoft released Internet Explorer 3.0, which was the first significant source of competition for Netscape. The companies set the bar high for one another each time a new version of the suites were released. Nonetheless, until the release of Internet Explorer 5.0 challenged Netscape Communicator version 4, Netscape was still the preferred web browser. However, when Internet Explorer 5.0 was released in 1998, Netscape had unresolved issues, like an outdated browser core, that led to its eventual downfall. Internet Explorer became the preferred browser, and AOL (who now owns Netscape) announced that it would not release a fifth version.
Netscape Navigator was the first web browser, and introduced the internet to everyday consumers. Because of its success, Netscape attracted competition that as a result has improved today’s internet browsing experience. The advances that Netscape contributed to the web’s progression, like the creation of an internet suite, were points of paramount significance in the history of the internet.
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netscape_(browser)
While in Beta, Netscape Navigator was called Mosaic after its parent company’s name, Mosaic Communications Corporation, which was renamed Netscape Communications Corporation after a name dispute with a competitor. Netscape Navigator was an immediate success because it was the most advanced browser on the web. Netscape built upon their success by evolving from solely a web browser into an internet suite (initially called Netscape Navigator but now named Netscape Communicator). In addition to having a browsing capacity, Netscape Navigator incorporated a full e-mail client, expanding their web capabilities into an internet suite. This was an important transition in internet history because people gained the ability to do more things on the internet than just browse the web.
In August of 1996, Netscape released version 3.0; around the same time, Microsoft released Internet Explorer 3.0, which was the first significant source of competition for Netscape. The companies set the bar high for one another each time a new version of the suites were released. Nonetheless, until the release of Internet Explorer 5.0 challenged Netscape Communicator version 4, Netscape was still the preferred web browser. However, when Internet Explorer 5.0 was released in 1998, Netscape had unresolved issues, like an outdated browser core, that led to its eventual downfall. Internet Explorer became the preferred browser, and AOL (who now owns Netscape) announced that it would not release a fifth version.
Netscape Navigator was the first web browser, and introduced the internet to everyday consumers. Because of its success, Netscape attracted competition that as a result has improved today’s internet browsing experience. The advances that Netscape contributed to the web’s progression, like the creation of an internet suite, were points of paramount significance in the history of the internet.
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netscape_(browser)
Friday, August 29, 2008
A bit about me...
I am a senior here at UB studying communication and psychology. I’m from Ithaca, NY but spent the past summer in Seattle interning at a public relations firm and exploring the Pacific Northwest. While I enjoyed living in the city, I also loved spending the summer outdoors barbecuing, kayaking and sailing. My last week in the Northwest I spent in the San Juan Islands, north of Seattle. We kayaked with the Orca whales that hangout in the North Pacific Ocean during the summer—this was an amazing experience!
Now that I’m back in Buffalo and the fall is approaching, I’m looking forward to the leaves turning colors and the weather cooling down. I love hands-on activities, so I plan to spend the fall working on various art projects that I’ve started. I especially love photography, and although I don’t have access to a darkroom anymore, I still use a film camera whenever I can! One of the projects I have planned for the fall is to create another Blurb book online with my photos from the summer.
Like most other people, I love traveling and look forward to the day that I can travel with my camera and take photos from all around the world. While I have spent a lot of time in Europe, I haven’t seen South America yet, so that’s next my destination list. I would also love to visit Cuba one day.
I hope to become a little bit more internet-savvy after taking this class. I also realize how important blogging is in today’s world, so I will hopefully become a blog-pro by the end of the semester! I also enjoyed the class discussions that occurred in a class that I previously took with Derek, so I look forward to more heated debates this semester.
Now that I’m back in Buffalo and the fall is approaching, I’m looking forward to the leaves turning colors and the weather cooling down. I love hands-on activities, so I plan to spend the fall working on various art projects that I’ve started. I especially love photography, and although I don’t have access to a darkroom anymore, I still use a film camera whenever I can! One of the projects I have planned for the fall is to create another Blurb book online with my photos from the summer.
Like most other people, I love traveling and look forward to the day that I can travel with my camera and take photos from all around the world. While I have spent a lot of time in Europe, I haven’t seen South America yet, so that’s next my destination list. I would also love to visit Cuba one day.
I hope to become a little bit more internet-savvy after taking this class. I also realize how important blogging is in today’s world, so I will hopefully become a blog-pro by the end of the semester! I also enjoyed the class discussions that occurred in a class that I previously took with Derek, so I look forward to more heated debates this semester.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)