DTC #2

Mark Warschauer makes argues, “a digital divide is marked not only by physical access to computers and connectivity, but also by access to the additional resources that allow people to use technology well,” (par. 21). In this case, the digital divide is the gap in access to and ability to competently use technology between different cultures, groups and people. He further argues the divide, “is not a binary division between information ‘haves and "have-nots,’ but rather a range of access and ability; there’s a gray area to the divide, not simply the blacks who can use computers and the whites who can’t (par. 22). By this definition, which I find wholly reasonable, the digital divide can be found between just about any group you find. My neighbor who shares a computer with his family that he doesn’t really know how to use on a dial-up internet has less access to a form of information technology than I do with my brand-new laptop I’ve conformed to do what I want on my high-speed wireless internet. When discussing the digital divide, it seems to me, someone just beginning to learn of the concept in some depth, that the degree of the divide and how much the specific gap in question matters is important to find, rather than merely stating where there is and is not a divide and treating all divides as an equal problem.

In Selfe and Self discuss a disconnect created with the common desktop interface designed around professional office symbols and materials (486). I’m not readily sure of what sort of metaphors would work better for an operating system, however, for two reason. The first is that I come from a fairly white-collar background and grew up around computers, so the interface is natural to me and thinking of anything different is difficult. The second is that many changes would mean making a massive change to computer norms from the ground up, such as eliminating the idea of “folders” as a very basic term.

One that could work in the interest of being creative, however, might be a building. “Windows” (not to borrow the term from Microsoft) could represent windows in to the building, and you choose the window for the “room” you want, or what sort of use you plan to make of the computer. Inside the individual rooms could be a simple chart displaying the programs available, with stored information simply in scrollable, sortable and searchable list formats. This may well be over-thinking it and is certainly likely missing some of the issues, but a building is something just about everyone has experience with in their lives, and the idea of going inside of buildings to get to what is inside is intuitive. There could even be a prompt when the system is first started asking what sort of “look” the interface inside the “rooms” could have as far as reflecting areas of work, following the ideas presented in Self and Selfe of kitchen counters and fast food restaurants if such a thing would be successful (486-7).


Works Cited

1. Selfe, and Selfe. Politics of the Interface. 1994. 485-88.
2. Warschauer, Mark. "Reconceptualizing the Digital Divide." First Monday 7.7 (2002): n. pag. Web. 2 Sep 2010. .