If you use the Chrome browser and Google services, you are likely familiar with the app launcher. The launcher is available from the square of blocks appearing in the header and provides easy access to the services Google must think are used most heavily.
The limitation with the launcher has been that these are not necessarily the subset of services that you use and the apps within the two sets of nine apps are not necessarily organized to meet your needs. It is now possible to customize both the Google services and the order of these services using App Launcher Customizer.
Once you add this extension to Chrome, the app launcher can be configured.
Selecting the “configure” link gives a user access to icons representing Google services and the services presently available from the launcher. You drag to add services and to reorder where they will appear in the launcher.
For example, I frequently take advantage of Google Scholar in the work I do. I can add this service and position it for easy access when I open the app launcher. This is a must have extension for heavy Chrome users.
As far as the big technology companies go, I am probably more a fan of Google than any other company. This admiration reflects how I value their products, but also how I value their way of going about doing business. Just for the record, I do not consider myself a freeloader. I pay for Google services (Google Music and general storage space) and I have purchased severely overpriced products (Chromebook Pixel) just because I wanted a particular development effort to move forward. My point – I do not expect technology companies to provide me services for free and this not the reason I support this company.
Google is obviously changing, some would say maturing, and a possible interpretation might be that they have become more focused. One tactic in implementing a more focused approach has been to cut several services. At least some number of individuals will have been users of these services and this will cause frustration.
Recently, I encountered a campaign to reconsider changes made to PicasaWeb. This service allows Google users to store photos online (a reasonable number at no cost and more storage for a small fee). I had noticed this change in that my efforts to access images I had stored as Picasa folders resulted in redirection to Google+. In my opinion, Google wants to build up Google+ as an alternative to Facebook and is making efforts to position Google+ as a kind of hub for multiple services.
The post (ironically on Google+) was brief, but it seemed to urge those who use PicasaWeb to encourage Google to maintain this service and to maintain it separate from Google+. Those who agreed were urged to + the post. Given the history of Reader, I would not be optimistic. Felix Binsack, the originator of the campaign, does have a point in indicating that he paid for PicasaWeb and I suppose while the time period covered by the payment was limited, you put work into a paid service assuming it will be continued.
I write mostly to inform those interested in the educational uses of technology and I think PicasaWeb has a number of important and useful features.
I like the connection between software on the desktop and storage in the cloud. Google provides free software you can download (Picasa) and this software can be used to take photos off your camera, organize photos, and upload those you want to store in the cloud and possibly offer to others. You can work entirely in the cloud, but if you work with hundreds of photos at a time, I think this local software is helpful.
Picasa is cross platform. I like iPhoto as well, but when you write for a broad audience (teachers) it is important to offer tactics they might apply no matter what the hardware provided for their use.
The desktop software allows flexibility in location of images on the computer. Picasa takes an approach different from iPhoto. You can store your photos where you want on your computer and still work with them using Picasa.
My experience with Google+ had not included a lot of activity using the built in photo tools. I admit after a little exploring I was more impressed. Google+ does allow the organization of photos in folders and allows the sharing of photos with a designated circle (or the general public). The organization, annotation, and sharing of photos are major issues for me when it comes for the educational potential of digital photography.
Here is a brief explanation of how to organize Google+ photos into folders. On the iPad, the process of organization would work something like this. While viewing a photo, select the “gear” icon and then select the “copy to folder” option from the options you are presented.
You will then select an existing folder or be allowed to create a new folder.
The process from a computer works a little differently. With a photo selected, you should have access to a “More” menu and you select “add to a folder”.
Clearly, creating folders and adding images to folders can be accomplished within Google+. I will also accept that the batch processes available from Picasa would make the process of organization more efficient.
The Chromecast is a small device that can be inserted directly into one of the HDMI ports (you may have only one) on your television. The device needs to be powered through USB so there is going to be a cord leading to the microUSB connector on the device – the other end of the USB cable either connects to a USB port on the television or to a traditional power adapter plugged into an electric outlet. The device does need to be powered.
The Chromecast costs $35 and it was this cost that attracted our attention. For personal use, we have a television in our lake place that is located where we cannot connect to the input from the satellite in a way we would find acceptable. If we used a splitter, I would have to watch Dancing with the Stars rather than the ball game should my wife be using our main television. I think there are great applications in the classroom. The device is inexpensive, portable, and can display content from a wide range of devices to a television. One might contrast the potential with that of the Apple TV.
Here is how I think about what you can do with a Chromecast. Think of the Chromecast as connecting to the Internet (via wifi) and you controlling what you connect to using a phone, Pixel, chrome browser, tablet, etc. Perhaps the comparison to a television remote would be helpful. If this approach makes little sense (you are not sending the content from the device to the Chromecast), note that once the programming is selected (e.g., a video), you can move on to the the phone, tablet or computer for a different purpose.
Control is exerted through Chromecast apps or Chromecast as an extension within the Chrome browser.You download the app to tablets/phones and the downloaded app works with other specific apps (YouTube, NetFlix, Google Movie and Music, Pandora). Note not every possible app that displays content is supported. Note also that the Chrome browser on tablets and phones are not expandable with extensions. Hence, it does not seem you can display browser content from phone or tablet (at least as far as I can tell). In contrast, you do not add apps to your computer, but you can add the extension to the chrome browser on a computer. The extension allows the content the chrome browser displays in a specific tab to be displayed on the television.
If the extension is installed, you stalled you should see the “cast” button (see red square below) and the use of this button allows the content of that tab to be displayed.
Here is possibly a way to think about what I have said. Say you wanted to watch a YouTube video on your television. If you were using a tablet or your phone, you would use the combination of the ChromeCast and YouTube app (you would need to have both installed). On your computer, you would use the Chrome browser (with the Chromecast extension) to view YouTube.
I believe it also accurate to suggest, you could not view a Vimeo video on your tablet, but you could from the Chrome browser on a computer.
This explanation is based on my personal experience with a Nexus 7, Chromebook Pixel, iPad, Samsung S4, and chrome on several computers. Expect future developments as modifications are made to existing apps (see this Verge article).
Microsoft recently announced their tablet would be donated to 10,000 educators attending this year’s ISTE conference and the device would now be sold for $200 in the education market. You wonder whether this is a way to get rid of inventory that will not sell, a clever long-term marketing strategy, or both. Anyway, these announcements got me thinking about why it would matter which device I use and which I would recommend. Have we reached the point that price should be the deciding variable?
This question has frequently been framed as whether tech hardware (e.g., laptop, tablet) has become a commodity. My interpretation of this term, given my ag background, is that the value of different products is roughly equivalent (e.g., corn, milk) so the expectation is the cost to purchase should be very similar and because of competition low. A Mac Pro would not fall into this classification. The question, if you are an Apple advocate, is whether the term should be applied to the iPad and say the Air.
I assume the coming days will see comparisons of the iPad, Nexus, and Surface. I do not own a Surface, but I have both iPads and a Nexus. My consumption and production needs can be accomplished with either. I still find the iPad a little easier to use and there are apps I prefer on this device. I admit in nearly all cases there are alternatives or I assume developers will eventually get around to making unique apps cross platform should the number of competing products reach a critical level.
What I happen to value now is that a device get me to the things I want to do in the cloud. Frequently, I need to work with Google apps, but this access could also involve Feedly, Evernote, DropBox, Box, Flickr, Diigo and probably a few others that do not come immediately to mind. Both Apple and Microsoft seem to be attempting to ramp up their cloud presence – the cross-platform opportunity to use iWork apps and Microsoft Office 365 seem promising (as long as the work better than Mobile Me). I bothers me a bit I do not see the revenue stream in all cases, but I leave that to the companies to work out.
For those of us who work to support classroom use of technology, a commodity mentality would discourage such a great focus on the identification of the next new thing and a greater focus on creative and productive ideas for using a core set of tools. Consider the popular conference sessions during which several well-known presenters attempt to wow the audience by demonstrating services and devices few know about. Entertaining, but not that productive. Interesting activities for classroom use would end up being far more helpful.
That all sounds like we are moving into an era of DULL. What could be wrong with commodity devices? The concern I think is the lack of motivation to improve capabilities rather than reduce cost? You might imagine this as the Dell vs. Apple approach. Where will the profit margins necessary for innovation come from?
Data protection is obviously a very important issue and companies that encourage us to use their services to store our data must take security seriously. Two-factor authentication has been developed to offer greater security. I have heard two factor authentication described as something you own and something you know. Cute and easy to remember, but the operationalization translates as “you know your password” and you “own your phone”. In concept it works like this, once you turn two-factor authentication on, your existing services are immediately disabled. You now must use the two factors to activate them again. So, instead of using your password which is initially rejected, you use a code (a number) that is sent to the SMS system on your phone when your password fails.
Here is my problem with this system. It seems designed by engineers with little insight into how real people actually use devices. It first assumes you have a smart phone (there is a way around this, but the way around makes the process even more complicated). Second, it is not system wide approach and must be completed for each device. My situation involved authenticating (so far) on my phone, two iPads and a Nexus 7, three lap tops and three desktops. This may be a little extreme, but not really. I have equipment purchased for me by my university and equipment I have purchased for my personal use, etc.
It gets worse. I commonly use Google apps through a browser. For a time, I had to authenticate each time I opened the browser. This was a hassle because I am not one of those tech guys who carries my phone or enjoys doing all possible things with it. The issue here concerned my phone settings. As a security measure (I use so many different devices – mine and public), I had my browser set to delete cookies when I shut down. Hence, the engineer’s solution of permanence was to set a cookie. So, I changed this permission and this seemed to fix the problem with browsers. It is kind of funny though, don’t you think, to address a security issue by eliminating a security precaution?
OK, so you authenticate once using something you have and you use your password (something you know) each time and you have a cookie set and this fixes the browsers (once for each one by the way). Then there are your apps. Apps don’t set cookies (I don’t think) so this process will not work for apps. Google has apps. What were they thinking?
There is a completely different system for apps. Instead of the app sending a message to your phone and setting a cookie, you request an app-specific password using your device and you are sent a 16 element password to enter. You destroy any evidence of this display. Then, the app works. Again, repeat with all devices.
OK – perhaps there is a better way and I don’t understand. However, what I have described here works, but was labor intensive.
I am concerned. I am heading to Russia for three weeks. I value security, but I also do not intend to take my phone. I know there is a way to request multiple codes I can take with me (printed on a piece of paper in my bill fold). I keep thinking there must be a better way.
I have encountered a privacy issue with Google hangouts that it seems Google has not considered. I am teaching a small graduate class and we are using Google hangouts. The quality of hangouts is better than the service purchased by the university and easy to use as well. Because I meet with these online students at a specific time, there are occasions when all students cannot attend. This situation is common when a course involves working students who may attend from several different time zones. Hangouts offers a convenient method for saving and serving video from the class. Hangouts “on air” saves a session to YouTube.
Here is the issue and the option it seems Google may not have considered. I am not particularly interested in opening up the class to causal observers. This is not a problem with a hangout as you can invite those in a circle and this limits access. However, if you also want to record the session, Google appears to assume you want to make the hangout public. This reveals the live feed in Google+.
My assumption is that Google assumes those wanting to share a video on YouTube in the future also want to make the video available as recorded. This would make sense in situations in which it was desirable to offer a video feed to more than the 10 individuals allowed to participate. The situation in which you want to limit access seems to have been ignored.
I suppose this was the case with last year’s summer class as well and I just did not realize it was happening. When participating in a hangout, one would seldom also watch the stream in Google+.
If there is a way to avoid this situation, I do not know what it is (perhaps it new options are available in the upgrade just released). The best I can do is to delete the announcement of the hangout in the Google+ stream after the class session has ended. This is not a serious issue for me, but it just seems strange that the opportunity to limit access to a circle (or circles) is then reversed by also making anything saved to YouTube a live public feed.
One of the biggest tech stories of the week was Google announcement that it would shut down Reader. This service is used by many to organize their RSS feeds – the syndication that announces new content. It is possible you follow such feeds using another app, but it is likely that this app loads information from Reader. For those of us who use RSS feeds to follow trusted sources, the loss of Reader is significant. This post features what is likely the front runner as a replacement.
Among those quick to offer options, Feedly seems the present choice. Since the recommendation has been so common, I thought it might be helpful to offer some comments on use. I review my feeds from my iPad, but it is helpful if a service can be accessed using multiple platforms. Feedly is available from Android and IOS and from an app operating within the Chrome, Safari or Firefox browser. Hence, you can work from your tablet, phone, or computer.
If you are a Google Reader user, migrating to Feedly is an easy process. Simply put, you connect to Feedly and login with your Reader name and password. Your existing feeds are now available in Feedly.
Once you have made the transition, you will want to be able to add and delete feeds. The addition of new feeds had me confused for a bit – it appears to work a little differently from a tablet than from a computer.
Here is the procedure from the app within a browser (Chrome in this example).
There is an icon in the upper left-hand corner of the app I assume is called “Home”. Selecting this icon, reveals then organizational structure you have generated for your feeds, but also the “add website” button. To add a new feed, select this button and then enter the URL for the site you want to follow.
I was unable to find a comparable button within the iPad app. Here the process seems to work in a different way. You can use Feedly to visit web sites much in the way you would use a browser. You search for a site using the search icon in the upper right-hand corner of the app. First search for the site. Options matching your search are listed and you select the one you want to display the site. Once displayed a + will appear at the top of the app. Selecting the + indicates that you want to add the feed. You will be asked to indicate how you would like to organize the addition and then you are finished.
Manage Consent
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional
Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
You must be logged in to post a comment.