Web 2.0 Kicked me in the Balls, Pointed, and Laughed
I have been developing websites for a number of years. Long before O’Reilly developed the term Web 2.0 and even longer before the unnecessary invent of the term Web 3.0. I have never quite understood the term Web 2.0. I have read a number of discussions on the topic but nobody seems to be able to definitively explain what exactly Web 2.0 is. Today I decided to do a little research to see if I could figure out exactly what it means. I have been asked frequently in meetings to include “Web 2.0 stuff” on projects. When asking the client for clarification this has meant anything from basic content management, to blogs, to social networking, to Ajax interaction.
I decided to start my research project by first checking Wikipedia. Many users refer to Wikipedia as a the Web 2.0 encyclopedia so I knew they would have some good information on what exactly Web 2.0 is. According to Wikipedia, the term was first used here in this context:
In the opening talk of the first Web 2.0 conference, O’Reilly and John Battelle summarized what they saw as the themes of Web 2.0. They argued that the web had become a platform, with software above the level of a single device, leveraging the power of “The Long Tail,” and with data as a driving force. According to O’Reilly and Battelle, an architecture of participation where users can contribute website content creates network effects. Web 2.0 technologies tend to foster innovation in the assembly of systems and sites composed by pulling together features from distributed, independent developers. (This could be seen as a kind of “open source” or possible “Agile” development process, consistent with an end to the traditional software adoption cycle, typified by the so-called “perpetual beta”.)
Web 2.0 technology encourages lightweight business models enabled by syndication of content and of service and by ease of picking-up by early adopters.
This is along the lines of what I have understood the term Web 2.0 to mean. Tim O’Reilly, who is credited with the invention of the term Web 2.0 and who actually technically owns it defines it as:
Web 2.0 is the business revolution in the computer industry caused by the move to the Internet as a platform, and an attempt to understand the rules for success on that new platform.
I noticed in O’Reilly’s definition specific technologies were left out. Often when discussing the move to the internet as a platform for applications specific technologies and libraries are mentioned. Things like Ajax and libraries like jQuery seem to be synonymous with the term Web 2.0. This is largely due to their prevalence in modern Internet based software. Here are some more takes on what exactly Web 2.0 is: http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/web_20_definiti.php. As I have read around the Internet on the topic the only consistent definition I have been able to find is that Web 2.0 is somehow related to the Internet.
I personally think Web 2.0 is an accidental term originally developed for marketing purposes the actually means nothing. It is a useful term for interfacing with customers who understand Web 2.0 is what they want but don’t actually understand what it is. The term itself cannot be accurately defined even by its creator and many of the technologies and online applications considered Web 2.0 in nature existed long before the invention of the term. The only real use I see for the term Web 2.0 is exactly what it was originally coined for, marketing. It can be used as a blanket term to describe whatever a marketer sees fit. Everyone and their grandma know they want Web 2.0. I know I personally want 2 of anything Web 2.0 with a hot side of Web 3.0.
No related posts.
If you enjoyed this post, please consider to leave a comment or subscribe to the feed and get future articles delivered to your feed reader.
Comments
No comments yet.
Leave a comment