Web 3.0 Dead Already?
I just finished reading a very thoughtful post written by Bill Snyder, A Preemtpive Strike: Death to Web 3.0 (and 2.0 while we’re at it). In his post, he makes quite a few valid points. One of those points is the fact that companies abroad are jumping aboard the web 2.0 bandwagon. It doesn’t matter what the company does, or what the company sells, that company needs a social network, and a Twitter user account even if they have no clear understanding as to why. As I have stated in numerous other conversations, social-networking is out of control but the good news is, the users themselves will determine which ones stay and which ones fall by the wayside.
Bill also makes another excellent point about the definition of web 2.0. Is web 2.0 one thing, or is it a series of concepts? I tend to agree with Bill in that the term describes a series of concepts. Since the web 2.0 O’Reilly definition was published, users have been coining the term Web 2.0 as a variety of different things. Whether it be the use of AJAX, website design or social-networking. Has anyone ever tried to explain what Web 2.0 is to a noob? It’s practically one of the hardest things on earth to describe because everyone has a different sense as to what it actually is.
Bill also states that Web 2.0 did not replace Web 1.0 and the web is not based on version numbers. Tim, I think your related to Bill! In any case, if you dissect a number of websites, web based applications, and quite honestly, anything that is related to web 2.0, it’s quite obvious that the web is still the web and the underlying code is still the same. So why are we still using the term web 2.0?
The whole point of defining Web 2.0 was to figure out where we are. Unfortunately for those who like buzzwords, we are everywhere. The whole point of discussing Web 3.0 is to figure out where we are going. Well, here’s the news: We’re not all going to the same place, and that is the beauty of this medium (or perhaps these mediums). The possibilities are endless and will continue to defy labels. We are just at the beginning of this “internet thing,” and what comes next is going to be many things — some will die anonymous deaths and others will change the very nature of the way we communicate.
I couldn’t agree with you more and I am definitely looking forward to what lies beyond the horizon of the web, however it will be described or defined.
Subscribe To Posts
Subscribe Via Email
Stay Updated Via Twitter
Loading ...
Justin Tadlock on 
Jeffro on 
Patrick D. on 
Lorelle on 
Steve on 
grande on 
John Kolbert
damn hairy human
GrokCode
Andrew
Brad
Stefan Vervoort
Comment by Dave Gray on 15 September 2007
I have heard that before Jeff
Looks like you’ve been digging a little deeper. I agree with you
Comment by Pete Balasch Jr. on 15 September 2007
Jeff I do think its all going out of hand with to many web 2.0 sites popping up all over the place. but only the strong will survive but who knows who the strong will be in the future. Some folks will be misusing the web 2.0 sites and could make them crumble and burn. But its going to be a fun ride to see what happens.
Comment by Website Design on 17 September 2007
I’ve gotten requests from many customers to make their old websites Web 2.0. It’s kind of a joke lately as people requesting this don’t know what it means. (For every person, web 2.0 means something different. For some, it’s ajax, for others it’s glossy buttons, others, its pin stripes, etc)
What is more, Web 2.0 is becoming a way of life in a sense. I think people are forgetting that these are websites we’re talking about.
Great post. Well stated!
Comment by Jeffro on 17 September 2007
Thank you for stopping by and leaving your input on the matter. That must drive you up the wall when someone request that you Web 2.0 ify their website, and you have to guess what they mean, or ask them what they really want. The client doesn’t know, they just want their site to be web 2.0 compliant. How have you begun to handle this?
Comment by Bill Snyder on 23 September 2007
First off, I try to find out whether they have an image in mind when they say “Web 2.0.” Sometimes that’s simply a codeword for “blog.” If there is a meaning, I start to switch the label, explaining that “Web 2.0″ means different things to different people, and that I want to avoid confusion.
Whether they have a clear sense of what they’re looking for or not, I then turn the conversation to business objectives. What is it that they want to achieve. If I keep driving the conversation in the direction of business objectives (even if I don’t use the term) and how technology/communications strategy will or will not meet those objectives, I’m in a better position to help the client meet its needs, and I’ve put the conversation into concrete terminology.
Comment by Jeffro on 23 September 2007
Hey Bill. This article is getting so many hits from Stumbleupon, it’s unbelievable.
At any rate, it sounds like you have come up with a winning strategy. At the end of your conversation with a client, how many times do they end up with some sort of “Web 2.0″ based website?
Comment by Bill Snyder on 23 September 2007
Hi Jeff. I should clarify something here. Though I still do some contract work, 95% of what I do is work for my employer. So, my requests are coming from management rather than clients. Some of the questions I’ve fielded:
1. Should we all learn XML
2. I heard a speaker say we should all have blogs. Should we consider that?
3. What is a blog
Incidentally, the answers were 1) We use XML, but training is staff to use it, without a specific reason we’re training them doesn’t really have a point. We’d be better off making sure everyone was proficient in Outlook. 2) Yes, we would benefit, but only if we really gave it a personal, informal voice, so that it’s not redundant with our current news section. Nobody here is going to put the effort into blogs to make them useful. 3) Well, blogs are themselves a broad concept, so I won’t replace that here.
Now, these aren’t one-time questions. They happen every few months. They will never go away. (Question three normally follows question two.) Nobody in the organization really wants a blog. They just want what is hot. A blog would be of real value to the organization, but only if those with real expertise (in our case, our senior management) wanted to contribute their ideas. Our communications staff doesn’t have the personnel needed to ghost write, nor the expertise in the subject matter to make a really useful blog. Or another way to put it, is that a blog sounds cool, but the organization doesn’t want to really invest in it. Don’t build what you won’t use.
As for whether we’re coming up with Web 2.0 solutions, well you know my feeling on that term.
I’m currently leading a UI redesign. It’s using a lot of AJAX, and integrates with YouTube and flickr. We are, however, a resource site, and that will continue to be our focus.
By and large, through, the 2.0ish stuff that has actually been implemented, has been through my initiatives to address real business needs, not through someone’s technological fantasies.
Comment by Jeffro on 24 September 2007
Awesome reply Bill. Its interesting to note that you said business just want what is hot at the moment without any knowledge of what that particular thing might be.
In my honest opinion, defining the term blog is just about as hard as defining Web 2.0, especially now a days. I wonder if you’ll do a write up concerning the term Blog. That would probably make for another interesting read.
Comment by Bill Snyder on 24 September 2007
I’m not one to define the word “blog” in a general sense. Really, what is the difference between posting and article and posting a blog entry. I think there is, however, a spirit to having a blog in a company site. It’s more informal; usually (and in my mind preferably) personal (written by one person); generally not an indirect, rather than direct, marketing tool (you’re not really selling something, but your talking about professional ideas and information that visitors will ideally find useful, and at the same time getting your ideas out there and driving traffic to a your site, which should lead to business).
I mean really, having blogs for your company is really about building up a personal relationship with the people you’re trying to reach. It’s also a chance for a two-way discussion that will hopefully help you improve your products and services.