http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/what-is-web-20.html?page=1
The above site, O’Reilly gave a comparison of two internet eras. The current one being called web 2.0, our internet era, the internet of today.
| Web 1.0 | Web 2.0 | |
|---|---|---|
| DoubleClick | –> | Google AdSense |
| Ofoto | –> | Flickr |
| Akamai | –> | BitTorrent |
| mp3.com | –> | Napster |
| 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 | –> | participation |
| content management systems | –> | wikis |
| directories (taxonomy) | –> | tagging (“folksonomy”) |
| stickiness | –> | syndication |
There is no specific definition to web 2.0. Many people have many different views on it. Some beliefs are very similar while others are extremely different. Having never heard the term “web 2.0″ before, I truly don’t know what my view is, so I’m going to try to break down this article very briefly to get a general idea.
- Services, not packaged software, with cost-effective scalability
- Control over unique, hard-to-recreate data sources that get richer as more people use them
- Trusting users as co-developers
- Harnessing collective intelligence
- Leveraging the long tail through customer self-service
- Software above the level of a single device
- Lightweight user interfaces, development models, AND business models
According to O’Reilly net, these are some of, if not THE, main components of web 2.0. So what does it mean? It means that web 2.0 is based almost entirely around the users. The users are what basically make up the internet, or internet based services. The internet is the community as opposed to being a series of pages. Blogs, file sharing, forums, and wikis are the essence of web 2.0. It’s as simple as that. The source is not entirely dependent on itself to grow. Less servers are needed for growing sources. That’s because each of the computers in a network can serve as a server now. Look at limewire and bittorrent, every time a new user joins, the network grows. The internet is no longer restricted to web browsers.
What about web browsers though? Where do they fit in all of this? Web browsers are still the central point of the internet, but websites have changed in nature. If that weren’t the case, then there would be no point in coining the term “web 2.0″. Notice how any popular site nowadays has some type of upload feature. Those sites also require you to register to be able to access all of their content. Why? So you can be apart of their database. It’s a type of security to make sure that anything doesn’t just pop up at the users of the site. If you upload offensive material, it can be gotten rid of, and if you become a problem, you can be gotten rid of. Web 2.0 grants the users power in ways that the internet didn’t a few years back and that’s one of the reasons that it’s called web 2.0. Websites have a more personal touch now than they use to.
So in conclusion, web 2.0 is user based, not developer based. It is interactive, not informative. It is service based, not product based. It’s a network that is constantly growing with the more people that access it. It’s comparable to a living breathing thing now, for it will never stop changing. It will always have too many components to be labeled as one thing and one thing only.
5 Comments
Comments RSS TrackBack Identifier URI
Leave a comment
I think its weird that they do not want to make the concept Web 2.0 a household name, but at the same time so many different online categories is listed under 2.0. Maybe they are waiting for the concept to sink into society first?? Or maybe they have more things in development that’ll take 2.0 to a whole new level.. Possibilities, Endless possibilities..
But I think they know what they are doing.. all of this is intentional.
Other than that… I dont really disagree with anything.
I think that after reading your blog that it has helped me to understand just a little more of wut 2.0 was meant to be about & I have read it more than once. To me it sounds like you have a better understanding about the article than i do. But tha’s why Im in this class.
Very good info. I do see whaer you are coming from in the sense of having to log in and become a memeber of a site to secure yourself with annoying pop-ups. Surfing the web now wan days does make it very vunerable to pop-ups, banners and adaware. But like someone has commneted in another blog, the use of Firefox or other browsers to help bring that problem down. Sure, it’s not 100% proof, but nevertheless, convenient. Great write up and you do seem like you have the article pin pointed down.
Marco
What about the whole issue of internet theft. How many times have we seen hackers or people who are up to no good stealing your info. right from the tips of there fingers. I guess that is an issue Web 2.0 that is not 100% proof. Sure, most sites gurantee there is security, but I am sure if they know what they are doing, they can find what they want. Any thoughts everyone????
Marco
Hmm Internet theft….
I think that no matter how hard the programmers/developers work on “securing”, the hackers and thieves are working harder to figure out how to crack the codes… so it is an on going battle, which wont really end until the end…of time….
-Ahmed