Re: If Academic Libraries Remove Computers, Will Anyone Come?

> And then libraries can focus once again
> on their core purpose.

Which is ??

( And if it's so core, why did libraries deliberately 
transfer their focus to something else ( in this case, 
computers ) ? )

( And if it's so core, why don't the library users 
recognize that fact, and act accordingly ?  Or am 
I missing something ? )

Apologies for all the questions, but at least they're 
not rhetorical.


 - Laval Hunsucker
   Breukelen, Nederland




----- Original Message ----
From: Peter Schlumpf <pschlumpf_at_GMAIL.COM>
To: NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU
Sent: Thu, April 29, 2010 11:36:37 PM
Subject: Re: [NGC4LIB] If Academic Libraries Remove Computers, Will Anyone Come?

I don't agree.  I think this push to have lots of computers in libraries is
a passing phase.  Sure, if one takes computer out of libraries now, the
numbers will indeed drop by half.  But 5 years from now, I don't see that
happening.  More and more, people have their own computers.  And with wifi
and other wireless technology becoming ubiquitous and cheap or free, the
days of rows and rows of public access desktop computers in carrels is
numbered.  The end of that couldn't come soon enough as far as I am
concerned.  Public access computers are a huge resource sink in money and
staff time to support.

Computers will always have a place in libraries, but in 5 or 10 years they
fade into the woodwork just like any other technology where they are
supposed to be.  And then libraries can focus once again on their core
purpose.

Peter Schlumpf
www.avantilibrarysystems.com


On 4/29/10, B.G. Sloan <bgsloan2_at_yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
> From today's Chronicle "Wired Campus" blog:
>
> http://bit.ly/dcnWwW
>
> Article quotes an assistant university librarian at the University of
> California at Santa Barbara as saying: ""If you take the computers out of
> the commons, I think you'd see our numbers drop by half." By "numbers", he's
> talking about people visiting the physical library.
>
> Provocative, but I don't know if I agree...
>
> Bernie Sloan
>
>
>
>