I've been using Web 2.0 for, oh, about eighteen months now (after pestering a few key people I managed to get into the beta test) and I've jotted down a few thoughts and impressions.
I think developers mostly love this "web upgrade" because all they have to do is copy 37signals' user-interface (which is little more than adding a background color to boxes) and get to put a check-mark next to the word "graphic design" under the application features list.
Everyone talks about Web 2.0 being faster but I don't think I've ever filled out so many damn forms in my life. To get into the alpha version of a website I have to sign up for some propaganda newsletter. Meanwhile beta sites require that I create a profile before I get get to any content. As I recall in Web 1.0 there was a lot more clicking, less typing.
Where are the apps for deporting illegal immigrants? Eighteen months on Web 2.0 and no one has thought of this? Seems like the killer app for half the US population that no one has thought of. Maybe that's for the best but I see dollar signs in the red states. Come on someone, Get Real already.
I used to design and make web sites. Now I have to tell people that I design and make web apps otherwise they look at me like I'm a C-average communications major newly graduated from some backwoods community college. Pity the word sites has a better ring to it and app rhymes with crap.
Silly people think Web 2.0 is all about innovation and software that helps people hack their lives for the better but I say it's mostly about new forms of advertising — it's everywhere. In the olden times of Web 1.0 we used to fight the proliferation of online advertising but now it's an excepted form of generating side-income and somehow you're an idiot if Google Ads aren't displayed across your site like a newly crowned homecoming queen proudly wears a sash.
There's so much to subscribe to in Web 2.0: site news, blogs, articles, comments, update notices, podcasts, and vidcasts. I never have to bother going to an actual web site, ever. It all comes to me. With all these delivery systems I wonder if we'll ever bother having a World Wide Web 3.0. I guess we'll have to call it something else, like Subscriptions 3.0 or Inbox 3.0 or Hyperlinks Suck 3.0.
What happened to Flash? I was surprised that Macromedia seems to have missed the boat on Web 2.0 like they did in Web 1.0. Sure it's used for promotions and advertising but nothing past that really. I guess it's great technology for making pretty headlines in Web 2.0 (thanks Mike Davidson!). I guess you could really say that Flash is the Photoshop of the Internet; only five percent of it's functionality is used by ninety-nine percent of it's users. And to think they gave Howard Hughes such a hard time for building the Spruce Goose. Tsk, tsk.
Why do I still have to check email in Web 2.0? I would have thought by now that people could send and receive telepathic messages but sadly I don't even see an alpha version that I can fill out form and get access to. Lame.
Speaking of advancements in human kind...still no hover cars. When I saw that an application was being created for me to check the current market price for whole roasted chickens I thought flying cards were going to be the next on the list. I bet George Jetson rolls in his grave every time a Basecamp account is created because we're still clinging to the Earth and have to clean up after ourselves without the aid of robots.
Join the fray by reading through and commenting at the end.
I don't think Web 2.0 is faster at all and not just because of all the huge form filling out, it's actually slower. Google Analytics grinds to a halt most of the time.
What happened to flash? Your paradigm, my friend :) Flash is bigger than ever, and penetrating into new genres every day. I mean, when was the last time you saw a winery launching an all-flash site? I think it's more a question of where you haven't been looking than why it isn't being used (because it is). I can tell you right now, more than ever I see an explosion in the flash industry. Just because the basement startups aren't using it, doesn't mean it's not exploding in the entertainment, technology, and about every other industry on the planet.
Personally, I think Web 2.0 is all about big talk for a small industry (relative to the internet as a whole). But seriously - where IS my hover car!
George Jetson would be pissed. What about "2001: A Space Odyssey" and other films, it's 2006 and we're not anywhere near living in outer space.
We need to start focusing on Earth 2.0 once we've got the whole Web 2.0 thing perfected. There would be real life CAPTCHA systems that would stop the illegal immigrants, and billboards would be able to detect demographics upon approach and target it's content for you're viewing.
Oh you haven't heard? Web 3.0 is not about creating products and services anymore. It's about selling PDFs which document how to create products and services. The really interesting bit is Web 4.0 though. That's all about selling PDFs which document how to sell PDFs.
"Google ads..."
I wonder who doesn't use adblock, let alone who clicks on ads anymore.
Flash is bigger than ever, and penetrating into new genres every day. I mean, when was the last time you saw a winery launching an all-flash site?
As I said, "...it's used for promotions and advertising but nothing past that really" which is what websites like the one you linked to are, promotional sites, I mean apps. Although I can't leave out the fine work from folks like Terra Ingonita who craft wonderful information sites for museums, but work like theirs is sparse.
Web 3.0 is not about creating products and services anymore. It's about selling PDFs which document how to create products and services.
Zing!
We need more mash-ups! Like umm... mixing sIFR with Flickr so we get... swf files that display images!
I keep forgetting where to put the p.erio.ds in Web 2.0 URLs.
One thing I love is people who seem to push Web 2.0 stuff that is obviously worse than Web 1.0.
For example, I work for a company that builds CMS software. Our company recently created an "Snappy AJAX search tool". The best thing about it is that it takes 5 times as long to display results. This may seem like bad thing, but there is no page refresh so performance isn't important. You also get a fantastic loading message!
On another note, I'm going to vomit if I here one more person mention the phrase 'user-contributed content' in association with Web 2.0 crap. I had a page on Geocities in like 1994.
...if I here one more person mention the phrase 'user-contributed content' in association with Web 2.0 crap. I had a page on Geocities in like 1994.
Ah Geocities, the grandfather of MySpace...whatever happened to it?
Greg: While that was only one example, I still think there is a massive bursting of Flash. Think about sites... err, apps like Google Video, YouTube which use flash to deliver video. Think about apps like Odeo and Wufoo using flash to better their product. There are also countless commercial sites everywhere introducing small bits of flash here and there to enhance the user experience.
Just imagine turning off flash and how much of the Web you'd miss.
Ah Geocities, the grandfather of MySpace...whatever happened to it?
Yahoo! bought it. Watch out Flickr!
Web2.0 is being lead by SQLonRails (http://www.sqlonrails.com). The screencast is very informative.
Don't forget the litany of dopey app names.
Your post pretty much sums up how I feel about this whole Web 2.0 stuff. Companies seem to think that giving people confections of all icing and no cake will line their pockets with gold and give them job security until they are old and grey. You don't need to have an actual business plan to succeed, just a series of radio buttons, empty fields and a cool new paradigm.
Well my friends, content always has and always will be king. The technology is indeed cool, and in the right hands useful, but woe are those that think marketing speak and a fancy color palette will get them anywhere besides the web's forgotten destinations.
Well, at least we have Happy Cogs out there, even if we're still lacking Spacely Sprockets.
I'm really wondering why nobody has built a Web 2.0 email harvester. It'd be fairly easy, just create the next "big thing," promising to solve all online problems, and then have an email sign up list, that you then turn around and sell to enterprising email spammers. It'd be golden, because they'd be spamming people who love to beta test things.
It's like Seinfeld's stand-up routine about restaurants. Normally, meats and vegetables sitting out for hours at a time would be disgusting, but we put some glass barriers and fluorescent lights up, and suddenly it's a buffet that everyone flocks to. We're all so trusting (myself included) of anything labeled “Beta” that it's almost scary.
There's so much to subscribe to in Web 2.0: site news, blogs, articles, comments, update notices, podcasts, and vidcasts. I never have to bother going to an actual web site, ever. It all comes to me. With all these delivery systems I wonder if we'll ever bother having a World Wide Web 3.0.
Seriously. I stopped using my RSS readers months ago. I miss the design of the information I was/am/will read at various web sites.
And frankly, dropping my RSS (addiction) has increased my productivity level to the point where we are working on a web 3.0 right now. It will leverage the new backpack API to remove all to-do items from you calendar by creating a perpetual loop that adds, then removes any new items via email post that is read and checked off by your RSS feed then re-submitted automatically via email. You will be getting so many things done that you'll be able to retire in weeks instead of years. Watch for it. Url will be to.dolists.no. RSS feeds for your empty lists should be up and running in weeks, which is our only planned feature other than user login. Sign up, subscribe and receive nothing. Ah productivity nirvana.
I used to design and make web sites. Now I have to tell people that I design and make web apps otherwise they look at me like I'm a C-average communications student newly graduated from some backwoods community college.
This has been my experience for years. I used to do CFML and table-based all-kinds-o-crap and was even one of the earlyish CSS freakazoids before I changed to systems and networks and when I told people I was a web developer, I'd always hear "my 13 year old nephew does that."
I was discussing this with the guys who make the IAEA's web site the other day. They had to sell a standards-based redesign up and down the river because nobody understands the value of the standards and, beyond that, nobody understands the value of the talent/labor.
Na ja!
What the hell is Web 2.0 anyway?
so, guys, who moved your cheese?
I'm not sure I can trust your opinion because:
1. This site is not in "beta".
2. The font-size is suspiciously small.
3. Your site appears to be well-designed, but I don't see a checkmark next to "graphic design" on the feature list
4. You don't give free advertisements to enough 3rd parties.
5. There are only three forms on this page, none of which subscribes me to a newsletter.
However, you do have the phrase "don't be an asshat" so maybe you're on the up and up after all. In fact, in my dreamworld, "don't be an asshat" is the motto for Web 3.0.
This reminds me of a wonderful song from the 80s by Daniel Amos, "It's the Eighties, So where's our Rocket Packs" -
It's the eighties so where's our rocket packs?
I thought by now I'd walk the moon
And ride a car without no tires
And have a robot run the vacuum
And date a girl made out of wires
Full Lyrics Here
I don't think Macromedia missed the Web 2.0 boat as bad as they missed the web 1.0 boat. With the path they are taking Flex down, being able to build flex apps as stand-alone, no server required product. When I first was in on the Flex 1.0 beta, I was very pleased at how easy it was to integrate with web services. The Ajax boom killed that, but I think they are bouncing back.
Think about apps like Odeo and Wufoo using flash to better their product. There are also countless commercial sites everywhere introducing small bits of flash here and there to enhance the user experience.
Flash is still going strong, obviously. It is the days of the pompous, obonoxiously loud, self-wanking intros begging for a big SKIP button that are (thankfully) largely over.
And yes - Bubble 2.0, here we come (again)...
No robots to do your cleaning?
http://www.irobot.com/sp.cfm?pageid=95
I think it was this site that I received a shellacking for not enjoying RSS readers and still using Safari tabs to umm, err, actually go to a website.
Just out of spite I created my new site completely in tables and worse yet, tables within tables. I also use plain old javascript with no AJAX-like features. The site doesn't validate or work on your cell phone or PDA and I feel so liberated!
I was surprised to find out though that last month more people saw my site's content through an RSS reader than a browser! Isn't that weird. It's weird and I don't like it.
I agree! Unfortunately because content is king, and I hate newsletters, I don't get much out of the web these days. I also hate being treated like I am an a blind idiot that doesn't know how to surf a website either.
All the web 2.0 ass clowns need put meaningful content before everything else. Thats why this site is one of 5 on my daily reading list. And I actually go to all 5 sites.
I'm not 100% sure that i know what web 2.0 is either. At first i thought it was some kind of application, and somehow i had missed version one. Then i thought it might be some kind of standard ... then for a while i thought it had something to do with ruby on rails. then i thought it had something to do with large screen real estate and large fonts and lots of black blacgrounds... then i stopped caring. And now thanks to your explanation i am happy y that i have stopped caring about it. But just out of curiosity where how was this term started? And what did this person/group think that they were defining?
I think you forgot about making web sites ugly because everyone knows ugly = good.
Seriously, though, what the hell is Web 2.0? Is this more of that viral marketing business, where I'm supposed to get excited about a product before I know what it is?
Web 2.0 is nothing but a new way to design. It's not a phase of what's good or bad as a product, but a phase of what's good looking or bad looking.
The only reason I like "Web 2.0" is because I actually like the look and feel of it.
Although, Web 3.0..that's going to far.
"Just imagine turning off flash and how much of the Web you'd miss."
Ummm...about none? I look at hundreds of websites a week and not a one of them uses Flash.
When I go to a site and it requires Flash I leave. There are plenty of other choices.
What is Web 2.0 ? See Tim OReilly.
The web lost me at "blogs."
I mean, seriously, why the hell did someone have to invent such an ugly word, and come up with such terrible sites to go along with it? Why can't you just call them "journals" or simply "websites"? It's nothing new. Even discussion boards are being called blogs now.
At first I thought it was just a horrible passing fad, like yo-yos, that would never catch on because of the ugly name. How sadly wrong I was.
God, how I wish suck.com was still around. Or As The Apple Turns. I'm going back to reading literature from those ... things ... what are they called? With the paper and the ink and the binding and stuff.
After I'm finished with Shakespeare, I'll make my own internet, with blackjack, and hookers.
You really should have adsense - don't you want to be a problogger?
I wish suck.com was still around.
Don't we all my friend, don't we all.
...don't you want to be a problogger?
In the worst way. If I was a pro blogger I'd create a Mexican wrestling name for myself, wear an orange jumpsuit with matching ski mask and take on the mainstream media, playing their game of "Oh I want to be popular and on television 24/7" all the while writing long prose of giberish about rockets and Tolstoy. And I'd call it Soviet Rocket Cowboys. Yehaw!
"I keep forgetting where to put the p.erio.ds in Web 2.0 URLs."
Best comment.
Hmm, well I'm somewhere around Web 1.847.2.
Web 2.0 is certainly high in the cool factor, though I get the feeling we all feel somehow futuristic and empowered with this new Force. It's certainly linked us together like never before. Never before have I been able to download pictures of Denny's at 2am, videos of frat guys farting, loads upon loads of editorials about why Dubya's evil (note: "evil" and "dumb" are two different ideas) so quickly and efficiently...
In terms of design, trends, and asthetics, Web 2.0 has done a brilliant job of adding the words "Flickr", "De.lic.ious", "Digg", "RSS", "Youtube", "GoodleAds" and "Web 2.0" to just about every blog in existance. Maybe I'm naive, but I find it slightly disturbing that Web 2.0 has tunnel-visioned expression into a few choice links. Do blogs (note to self: don't use word "blog" so much) and other web sites become more creative and outside-the-box or less?
Pretty soon every blog will be nothing more than a few external links to other communities where videos, pictures, and writing spew forth. That's all well and good - they serve tremendous advantages. However, give me an intriguing web site working on its own cylinders any day...I'm past my limit on hours at Flickr.
While these communities are amazing, they seem to be phasing out the individual for a fast-paced click-click-click barrage of random user images and words.
Give me unique and personal design. I want individuality. I want to see a person's ideas bleed through the screen.
Regarding the Flash winery site: any site where I have to type in my date of birth before I can enter I won't enter. Please don't insult my intelligence...
As I see only two guys really mocks on «Web 2.0-armored-battle-cruiser»— Mr. Zeldman and Mr. Greg Storey. Fine.
Just know that some Russian guys agree with.