Today is the third day of the Office 2.0 Podcast Jam. So far, 8 podcasts are available. All touch on different aspects of, as Cote says, "*2.0" (Office, Enterprise, Web). Richard MacManus provided a great keynote on Office 2.0 as a paradigm shift. He spoke of the importance of "Web native functionality" in "office" applications. Anne Zelenka, the jam founder, conducted a jolting interview on what it really means to be a paperless office in Afghanistan. Laura Blankenship described the barriers to *2.0 adoption in higher education. Scott and Cote seemed to have a great time talking about Identity, Learning and Shame. Ken Camp talked about the importance of presence, relevance and availability in respect to VOIP platforms. Greg Olsen spoke of businesses "going bedouin". Eric Severson spoke on the rules of Office 2.0, which I then proceeded to break in my mixing "*2.0" and SOA for a business-focused Enterprise Toolkit.
I’ve enjoyed all the podcasts, and have made notes to check into the following: dabbledb, coghead, zimbra, and embedded presence. I’m sure that list will grow as the week goes on. The great thing about these podcasts is they are informative, yet short. The longest one is 15 minutes. The average seems to be 7 minutes. So, if you have a break between meetings and/or phone calls, jump on over. I know I’ll be back, I want to hear what Sandy has to say on "Web 2.0 and BPM", as well as the latest from the Office 2.0 conference (travel required to that one!).
For those interested in the technology behind the jam, see this post of Anne’s. For my own podcasting, I used Audacity and followed these instructions. It was pretty simple, even for a podcast newbie.
Jon Carter says
Why call it podcasting? What does any of this have to do with an iPod?
brenda michelson says
Here’s an excerpt from The Guardian Unlimited Technology:
“What does ‘podcast’ actually stand for?
According to Creative Labs, it stands for “Personal On Demand broadCAST” (from http://www.zencast.com/about). However, that interpretation differs significantly from that intended by web developer Ben Hammersley. He first used the phrase in an article in the Guardian on February 12, 2004, as a synonym for the unwieldy “audioblogging”. He meant it as a contraction of “broadcasting” (because the content is sent over the net) and “iPod” (as a byword for MP3 players).
Says Hammersely: “Creative are talking rot. The pod in ‘podcast’ was obviously and blatantly meant to refer to the iPod. ”
And here’s the opening from the Feb 12, 2004 article:
“With the benefit of hindsight, it all seems quite obvious. MP3 players, like Apple’s iPod, in many pockets, audio production software cheap or free, and weblogging an established part of the internet; all the ingredients are there for a new boom in amateur radio.
But what to call it? Audioblogging? Podcasting? GuerillaMedia?”