Loving Web 2.0 tools

Does loving a Web 2.0 tool require research, reflection, and recall?

http://www.flickr.com/photos/37996583811@N01/4919948842

Research: Brooks-Kirkland shared criteria used for "scoring" the OSLA Great Web 2.0 Face-Off at the 2011 OLA Superconference during a recent webinar I participated in. 
Identified as Types of Learning Boosts from Technology Peterson (2011) lists:

• motivation
• learning how to learn
• efficency
• creativity and content creator
• deep understanding of content knowledge
• assessing what we really value
• teaching strategies; techniques and organization

Reflection: What do I think about the selected tools?

• ease of access  (registration, login)
• learning curve
• tech support
• availability using school network
• intuitive interaction
• multiple applications: personal, professional, educational
• student engagement
• product

Recall: Think back-how did it go?

• Diigo (LOVE/LOVE)
• toolbar to capture, highlight, sticky note, bookmark, annotate, share and send
• group membership and creation
• tagging
• PLN! at your finger tips
• multiple applications professional, personal and educational

•  Blogger (LOVE) 
• simple to learn 
• gadget gallery and embeddable options
• tagging
• searchable
• no school access for student use

• Flickr (LIKE/LIKE)
• absolutely worth the time
• multiple teaching possibilities
• flickrcc - great source of digital images
• tagging

•  Thinglink (LIKE)
• simple to learn
• multiple applications

• PodOmatic (LIKE)
• simple to learn 
• recording and hosting
• tagging

• Masher (like)
• drag and drop timeline
• simple to learn
• limited length of video
• glitches in final frames, embedding