On Wednesday, February 5, 2014, RootsTech will hold its Innovator Summit. Perhaps you have been wondering why there is a "separate" section of the Conference. The reason is quite simple, this is the portion of the Conference dedicated solely to the "Tech" part of RootsTech 2014. Part of the Innovator Summit is the annual Developer Challenge where the newest and best genealogy software will be considered for recognition. Inclusion in the Developer Challenge itself is an honor. Of course, prizes are awarded the winners, but the idea here is to foment development of useful and innovative programs for use by the entire online family history community. You should note, that last year's winner, Treelines, is an exhibitor at this year's Conference. Many of the products featured will show up as finished products whether or not they actually win a prize.
In addition, this one day event gives the participants the unique ability to mingle and attend classes with those who are immersed in developing the types of programs that will come out in the future. As genealogists, we spend an inordinate amount of time looking at the past, this one day is a window into the future. A future we will all share whether we know about it or not. For my part, I would rather know about what is coming. I will be attending the Innovator Summit and reporting on the proceedings hourly or whatever it takes. I will be using the hashtag #innovatorsummit in the title of each of my blog posts. Of course, I will be somewhat limited because of the noise level, I will have to keyboard everything instead of using voice recognition, like I often do now, but I will try to keep up with as much as possible about what is going on.
As a developer, I doubt I would have gone if it weren't for the developer track and the Innovators Summit. I only wish they didn't have so many talks scheduled for each session. I can only be in one place at a time.
ReplyDeleteThanks for the comment. I have the same problem and have recruited my wife to attend some of the classes I can't.
ReplyDelete