Courtesy of O'Reilly, the folks who helped coin the term "Web 2.0" here's a list of Web 1.0 entities and their Web 2.0 equivalents:
Web 1.0 --> Web 2.0
DoubleClick --> Google AdSense
Ofoto --> Flickr
Akamai --> BitTorrent
mp3.com --> LimeWire
Britannica Online --> Wikipedia
personal websites --> blogging
evite --> upcoming.org and EVDB
domain name speculation --> search engine optimization
page views --> cost per click
screen scraping --> web services
publishing -->
directories (taxonomy) --> tagging ("folksonomy")
stickiness --> syndication
Since there's not a radical new technology being used here, just technology being used differently do you think Web 2.0 is still a good moniker? Is it simply a marketing ploy or does it have real meaning? Is there another name you think would be better?
Also, what do you think the impact of this interactive way of using the Web is having on eCommerce? How do you think you can use "Web 2.0" stuff in your efforts to create a viable business on the Web?
2 comments:
Ah, the great name debate. Why not use web 2.0 it seems people are already up in arms about the name so it is becoming recognizable. I always say to my wife, "you're so web 1.86" and she understands what I mean. So let's run with web 2.0 and have a laugh.
It is all about interconnectivity so as a business just dictating what the customer will get we now have customers interacting which other customers and giving feedbac to the business. This will bring about higher quality products because with bad word of mouth you are sunk in this day and age. Take a look at Digg to see the power of a community of viewers. Very influential indeed.
Doug Owens
Doug - you and your wife are geeks :)
I always think of web 2.0 in the design sense...how everything has a reflection or glossiness, how hard edges are going away to be replaced by smooth, rounded corners. Everything is cleaner, easier to read, nicer to look at. Web 2.0 is a welcome change to my over-stimulated eyes.
Post a Comment