Slashdot Mirror
Five Reasons Why Web 2.0 Matters
jg21 writes "Dion Hinchcliffe, who is becoming the closest thing outside of Tim O'Reilly to being a Web.2.0 popularizer and evangelist, has summarized what he considers to be the five major benefits of Web 2.0 best practices. Hinchcliffe singles out the tactical potential of aligning with Web 2.0's increasingly ballistic trajectory: 'You can use the leviathan forces of attention and enthusiasm that are swirling around Web 2.0 these days as a powerful enabler to make something important and exciting happen in your organization.'"
Because it's still just hype. Why was this even posted?
"I've been spending a lot of time lately with folks around the mid-Atlantic region and talking to them about Web 2.0."
Firstly that there are a lot of people on Ascension Island. Secondly that there are a lot of web type people there!
Maybe he was referring to the Azores...
See this if you're confused.
You are not the customer.
Web 1.0 - Documents
Web 1.5 - Documents + Web Applications that pretend to be documents
Web 2.0 - Documents + Web applications acting like the interactive applications they are
Web applications are now free from the "static document" paradigm that previous chained them down. The web is no longer pretending to be static. That's not to say Web 2.0 is "mature" by any means, but the groundwork as certainly been laid.
BTW - There are a bunch of concepts and methods here that truly are revolutionary. The more I use it and understand what it means, the more I think Web 2.0 is not a bad name, and may even be justified.
-Pete
Soccer Goal Plans
That's how I sumamrize this article. There's not a single nugget of real information in this article. It's a lot of marketing, blogging bullshit, which quite honestly, doesn't mean anything. "synergy" and "critical mass" and "collective intelligence" are just buzzwords with as much meaning as "Web 2.0".
Once you find out, you'll realize it's just a bunch of "synergistic ideas."
Web 2.0 fundamentally revolves around us and seeks to ensure that we engage ourselves, participate and collaborate together, and mutually trust and enrich each other, even though we could be separated by the entire world geographically. And Web 2.0 gives us very specific techniques to do this and attempts to address the "people problem" directly.
Sweet! It gets rid of trolls, uneducated users, and the typical "Dumbass Element" that prevails on the Internet?
No? Oh, then Web 2.0 sucks just as much as "Web 1.0".
FTFA:
It's when software developers naively use technology to try to solve our problems instead of addressing the underlying issues that people are actually facing.
This is nothing more than marketing hype. First step in marketing hype is to identify with your audience so they feel you're one of them.
Why does this matter? It has to do with critical mass and synergy, two vital value creation forces.
Yeah, my thoughts exactly.
This is the Internet. You can say "fuck" here. - AC
The Focus of Technology Moves To People With Web 2.0. One of the lessons the software industry relearns every generation is that it's always a people problem. It's not that people are the actual problem of course. It's when software developers naively use technology to try to solve our problems instead of addressing the underlying issues that people are actually facing. Then the wrong things inevitably happen...
Or does someone have a link that's translated from PR bullshit to English?
The real 5 reasons why Web 2.0 matters:
1. VCs can make a ton of money
2. People with MBAs who know nothing about technology can make a ton of money
3. VCs can make a ton of money
4. People with MBAs who know nothing about technology can make a ton of money
5. VCs can make a ton of money
The average Joe will get stuck holding stock in companies with AJAX-enabled web sites for pet food sales. Joe's rationale will be the result of all of the hype he read about Web 2.0.
~
"I'd rather be a lightning rod than a seismometer." -Ken Kesey
has a better 'Web 2.0' summary that I prefer. http://www.paulgraham.com/web20.html/
There is truth in humor.
"You can use the leviathan forces of attention and enthusiasm that are swirling around Web 2.0 these days as a powerful enabler to make something important and exciting happen in your organization."
So in otherwords, you can use new ideas to make your business applications better. Well no shit sherlock!
I've said it before and I'll say it again, we need to take our language back from the marketing people. We keep cramming more and more words in to a sentence while the real information content is falling. People, please, start using English rather than this marketing horse-shit. Language is about communciation and not obfuscation!
Simon
OK, I'm not a theoretical physicist, more of the practical variety (I shoot things). Assuming we're talking about things happening down here on the planet, the term "ballistic" is generally meant to suggest "propelled with an impulse, and not guided" (like a kicked football, or a bullet). The trajectory of such items usually involves:
1) Slowing down
2) Dropping (literally) like a rock
That is not the mental image I'd like to paint of some exciting new IT initiative. Honestly. Might as well say, "We've got to get in on this now! Why, this technology's going postal!"
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
Paul Graham has a new essay on this:
Does "Web 2.0" mean anything? Till recently I thought it didn't, but the truth turns out to be more complicated. Originally, yes, it was meaningless. Now it seems to have acquired a meaning.
He's resistant to buzzwords, so I found this interesting.
http://www.thebricktestament.com/the_law/when_to_
You *are* aware that browser-related part of Web 2.0 is heavily built on top of AJAX, which uses XmlHttpRequest, which was *introduced* by Microsoft, right? FF was the one catching up....
...sweet zombie Jesus! It's reading over 40 mega-Ballmers!!!
Don't you have someone you'd die for?
It has to do with critical mass and synergy, two vital value creation forces. Taken individually, Web 2.0 techniques like harnessing collective intelligence, radical decentralization, The Long Tail are quite powerful ... You need a core set of Web 2.0 techniques in order to be successful and then the value curve goes geometric. This is why the ROI of software built this way is so much greater. ...
Using Web 2.0 you can build better software with less people, less money, less abstractions, less effort, and with this increase in constraints you get cleaner, more satisfying software as the result. And simpler software is invariably higher quality.
Yeah, right.
What really matters, if you're selling stuff on the web, is that people can 1) find what they want, 2) order it without much hassle, and 3) get what they ordered without delays or screwups. It's 2) and 3) that matter, because they determine repeat business. Serious retailers talk about the "abandoned shopping cart" ratio, or how many people started the process of buying something but never finished the transaction. One screwup in the fulfilment process usually loses the customer. Most profit is on repeat customers, remember.
The "Web 2.0" stuff is mostly about the front end, the advertising/marketing part of the operation. That only matters in attracting first-time customers.
In the end, all the "Web 2.0" stuff gives you roughly the capabilities Flash has now. If that was so great, we'd see more all-Flash sites.
Where do these people come from?
Web 2.0 - A term for the technically illiterate denoting the passage of time
Best Practices - A term describing what the technically inept do to avoid getting fired
Web 2.0 Best Practices - What the technically illitate ask the technically inept do to, giving rise to the world's worst, bug-ridden software.
- The Kessel run is for nerf herders. I can circumnavigate the entire Central Finite Curve in a lot less than 12 parse
Certainly there are other reasons why Bathroom Tissue is important and you're welcome to list them here, but I think this captures the central vision in a way that most anyone who craps can grasp and access.
BTW, I will also use this moment to state that Bathroom Tissue is a terrible name for this new vision of paper-based people-centric product. Except that is for every other name we have at the moment (for example, like "next generation of the arsewipe"). So I will continue to use Bathroom Tissue until something better comes along.
OK, don't agree? Please straighten me out. Why does bathroom tissue matter (or not) to you?
Toilet paper anyone?