Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Google Scholar: Not Ready for Prime Time?

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the is-the-first-version-of-anything-ready dept.

reptilicus writes "The Thomson Gale publishing group has put together a comprehensive review of Google Scholar, and they find it highly lacking compared with similar offerings from Highwire Press, Scopus, and The Web of Science. Will Google's overhyped offerings drive these superior services out of the market?"

5 of 231 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Oh baby, Overhyped, YES, YES, YES. by Kludge · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    Parent post hits it on the head. Why is Google overhyped? Because slashdot posts an article everytime someone there picks his nose.

  2. Re:beta by Enigma_Man · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    I'm under the impression that dumb people like yourself misunderstand the meaning of the word "beta" it means it's not ready to use for something that matters yet, just for testing.

    They do have many other services that aren't in beta (some on that page are beta, but most aren't) that you are free to use that have been tested and brought out of beta, just like the current beta offerings will be changed to once the kinks have been worked out.

    -Jesse

    --
    Nothing says "unprofessional job" like wrinkles in your duct tape.
  3. Re:beta by Enigma_Man · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    What, pray-tell would they be liable for? You can't sue them because their maps are wrong, there's disclaimers for that on every map site.

    This is all very retarded. Even services that aren't in beta (hotmail, mapquest, etc) have disclaimers in their policy to let you know that they aren't liable if you drive off a cliff, or don't get your e-mail. Would you all be more happy if Google didn't call their in-testing things "beta" and instead released buggy stuff to the masses without any warning (like MS)? hmmm?

    All of the complaint posts about Google using "beta" are beyond retarded. If you don't like it, don't use it.

    -Jesse

    --
    Nothing says "unprofessional job" like wrinkles in your duct tape.
  4. Re:Utterly shocking by DerekLyons · · Score: 0, Flamebait
    I've used Highwire, scholar and a couple of other (closed) systems to find relevant papers. The conclusion? I prefer google scholar.

    The reason? Most of the stuff I find is easily accessible. It really annoys me when I (or my University) has no access to more then the abstracts journal X.

    Second reason: google is fast and clean. You would not believe the horrible interfaces or some of the others. javascripts, java or even proprietary programs needed to access the databases.

    A (very recent) PhD.

    In simpler terms - you only care that it's easy to find and fast to use. More proof that the educational system is gone to hell when a PhD cares less about accuracy and content than flash and splash.
  5. Re:Utterly shocking by DerekLyons · · Score: 0, Flamebait
    Uhm, no. Let's face it: there is too much research out there that _could_ be relevant. There isn't enough time to order all those articles from faraway libraries, or money to buy them online. To be able to do a proper literature survey you need to be able to get the paper instantly and read just as much as you need of it.
    In your own words - Uhm, no. A proper literature survey means reading a broad spectrum of papers, not reading just what is quickly and easily available.

    "Proper literature survey" != "grabbing what's handy"

    Therefore, I rarely cite papers that are not available for free online.
    In other words, cheap and easy is more important than complete and correct.