Heard ‘Round the Blogosphere: Web 2.0
Regarding the definition of web 2.0, a recent Digg user had this to say: “Web 2.0 is a new buzz word that will allow startups to get funding again if they can tag themselves as web 2.0… If your website has gradient colors and uses ajax you’re already web 2.0 baby!” Somewhat true, but I prefer Nicholas Roussos’ definition of the term: “What I find most interesting about Web 2.0 is that it’s really a return to Berners-Lee’s vision of Web 1.0… the Web is finally meeting its original potential.”
Maybe I should stop using that phrase (how avant-garde, eh!). Any ideas? The social web? Slick website? Cyberspace 2.0? Post your web 2.0 replacement names in the comments below.
5 Comments
Yea, the term gets passed around pretty loosely, but I think a better term would be “The Usable Web.” For the most part, people use the term when they thing a site is real usable.
People attach so many different meanings to the term “Web 2.0” that it’s difficult, at best, to tell what they’re talking about. I can easily conceive of several different terms, depending on which meaning you want:
Do you mean the social aspects of “Web 2.0”? How about “The Participatory Web”, or maybe “The Interactive Web”?
Do you mean the technology? How about “Usability for the Web”, or maybe “Interactivity for the Web”?
Or, there’s the business side: “Ridiculous buzzword 2.0, trying to get Funding 2.0 so we can make a little money riding Dot-Com Bubble 2.0” >:)
The Read-Write web.
No, Web 2.0 is perfect.
You guys are getting confused. There is a very real, very specific, and much larger definition of Web 2.0 by the same group who coined the term: O’Reilly Media.
Tim O’Reilly wrote a whole article on what Web 2.0 is exactly. Usability is just one of the concepts involved. There is also accessibility, participation, syndication, taxonomy, and more.
Ever wonder who keeps thinking up all this crazy stuff like RSS feeds? OPML?
Go to the Web 2.0 Conference in San Diego.
Bubble 2.0? I want to put a definition on it as well, but “meeting its original potential” still doesn’t do it.
Why? Too many people are still using the term flippantly when they don’t understand it. It’s almost like a marketing plug to get people’s attention. What does it mean though?