The arrival of Google Scholar should set librarians off into another round of insecure criticism. Of course it’s not as good as what libraries can offer, but at least Google are trying to forge a way ahead. Libraries will be like the knight shouting “None shall pass!” while Google steadily chops our limbs off and gets on with finding the grail. Crap analogy I know, but the point is that Google will continue to refine it, bung some adverts in for tweed jackets with patches at the elbows to appeal to academics, and steadily shoulder out rivals. Google Scholar has two main advantages:
- The interface is so simple, but can be refined if desired (with author: for example). Most academic databases, and library OPACs (ask Dorothea Salo), are appalling at this
- It searches a load of stuff at once, including Worldcat.
It does need a lot of work, especially in the area of rights and permissions, a problem that exists with bought-in academic databases like Medline anyway. There must be some way for libraries to hook up with the system rather than beat it in the same way that SFX brings together database searches, electronic material, and library holdings.
More references can be found at Librarianinblack, LibraryCog (via Caveat Lector), and of course Google. There is even a weblog: On Google Scholar if your day is that empty.