Slashdot Mirror


Web 3.0

SpunOne writes "Apparently Jeffrey Zeldman is as sick of Web 2.0 as many of us have become. In his latest article, titled "Web 3.0," he really sticks it to the Web 2.0 fan boys, and dispels a lot of the hype generated by our young new friends. It's easy to grow apathetic when a new idea gains so much traction so quickly, but his points are clear and accurate, and deserve consideration."

25 of 316 comments (clear)

  1. pfft.. by tont0r · · Score: 4, Funny

    Web 4.0 will kick his Web 3.0's ass. He needs to get with the times.

  2. Just In Case... by millahtime · · Score: 3, Funny

    Just In Case I make My websites with Web 8.0. This should keep me good for at least 2 or 3 more months.

    1. Re:Just In Case... by infomagic · · Score: 2, Funny

      That's not cool. The cool thing these days is Web 3.1415926....

  3. That's all well and good. . . by igibo · · Score: 5, Funny

    . . .but here is an indisputable rebuttal.

    http://www.parm.net/web2.0/

    Come on people, we're all sick of buzzwords, but you can't deny the reality of Web 2.0!

    Igi

  4. start thinking about usability and design by digitaldc · · Score: 5, Funny

    more often than not, big teams have slowly and expensively labored to produce overly complex web applications whose usability was near nil on behalf of clients with at best vague goals.

    We need to immediately have a meeting to discuss reducing complexity, increasing usability and clarifying our goals.

    --
    He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
    1. Re:start thinking about usability and design by ladyKae · · Score: 5, Funny
      --

      Smile, it confuses people

    2. Re:start thinking about usability and design by TheRealMindChild · · Score: 4, Funny

      More to the point, our potential to leverage dynamic interfaces and drive seamless infrastructures leaves us needing disintermediate clicks-and-mortar methodologies to synergize back-end metrics. We are then able to synthesize e-business infomediaries while maintaining a aggregate efficient convergence.

      Brought to you by the fine people at http://www.robietherobot.com/buzzword.htm

      --

      "When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
  5. Web XP is where it is at! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    This will beam web content right into your brain! Then.. to enable the DRM, a thug will come to your location and give you a hit or two upside the head with a sledge hammer.

    Only problem I am having is getting people to access Web XP a second time :(

  6. Big Deal by Give+Me+a+T,+Give+me · · Score: 2, Funny

    I was surfing the web 2.0 on my Commodore 64

  7. hold on a bit longer by gEvil+(beta) · · Score: 4, Funny

    Everyone knows that it won't reallty be usable until it hits Web 3.1.

    --
    This guy's the limit!
    1. Re:hold on a bit longer by phuked · · Score: 2, Funny

      Just wait for Web for Workgroups (WfW) 3.11, it'll have networking!!11!

      --
      Rebel Without A Pause
  8. Re:Oh boy. by LiquidCoooled · · Score: 3, Funny

    Slashdot should jump the bandwagon and incorporate Web 4.0

    (its just like Web 2.0 but duped)

    --
    liqbase :: faster than paper
  9. Re:Oh boy. by MountainMan101 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Web 3.0 is for Fedora fan-boys. Debian users will continue with Web 1.0 (or rather 1.1), which has the same interface as 1.0 but all of the security fixes of 2.0 backported.

  10. Re:More like 0.2 than 2.0 by click2005 · · Score: 5, Funny

    "WWW:The Next Generation"... Aren't you a bit ahead of yourself there?

    WWW : The Markup Protocol
    WWW 2.0 The Wrath of Kazaa
    WWW 3 The Search for Social Networks
    WWW 4 The VRML Homepage
    WWW 5 The Final Flickr
    WWW 6 The Undocumented Context

    then we get to WWW:TNG

    --
    I am a free slashdotter. I will not be modded, blogged, DRM'd, patented, podcasted or RFID'd. My life is my own.
  11. Patented business methods -- find me some VC! by wild_berry · · Score: 2, Funny

    I have replaced you with a shell script. You are no longer needed.

    However, I have just replaced myself with two shell scripts: the one above and one taking my venture-lent millions and IPO'ing. Further, I have a patent to the business method of replacing employees with shell scripts and will IPO it to make millions. Then I'll write a shell script -- most likely in a different language, Ruby, Haskell, PHP, perhaps -- to do the same as a Web 2.0 thing before reinventing myself for Web 3.0 (there exists a business method patent for reinventing the same business methods again and again, but it's being contested by religions and crime syndicates).

    P.S. Word to the wise about Web 3.0: it won't be stable until 3.1 and then 3.11 will bring real connectivity to the Web...

    1. Re:Patented business methods -- find me some VC! by The-Bus · · Score: 2, Funny

      You mean Web 3.11 for Workgroups? After all, it's e-robustness gives it a best-of-breed i-enterprise synergy.

      --

      Small potatoes make the steak look bigger.

  12. Re:Web 2.0: Hype or Real?? by Jesus_666 · · Score: 2, Funny

    We clearly need 2.0 2.0. It's just like 2.0 1.0, but it's totally interactive ans dynamic and socially collaborative with Ruby tags all over the place. It also has rounded corners.

    --
    USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
  13. In other news... by NardofDoom · · Score: 2, Funny
    In other news: Only a very few people will get rich and everyone else will continue to have to work for a living, many of them in jobs they don't like.

    Since when has not being a multi-millionaire been a bad thing?

    --
    You have two hands and one brain, so always code twice as much as you think!
  14. Re:Paul Graham by MuValas · · Score: 2, Funny

    Why can I not have moderation points at a time like this to help others see the genius in your statements?

    Although, I would have stated your post more like ... "Fuck Paul Graham with a red hot fork".

    I think your way is a bit more diplomatic though.

  15. Re:Screw that, I wrote about Web 4.0 by mooingyak · · Score: 3, Funny

    ahem... but it turns out that the real use is...


    Web 1.0 is about allowing individuals to create and share porn.
    Web 2.0 is about allowing groups to create and share porn.
    Web 3.0 is about allowing societies to create and share porn.


    Or more succintly, since the above distinctions seem pretty meaningless (in both my and your versions), web = porn (or ideas, or whatever you think really happens on the web).

    --
    William of Ockham had no beard. The most likely explanation is that it was chewed off by squirrels every morning.
  16. Re:Screw that, I wrote about Web 4.0 by Murmer · · Score: 0, Funny
    You're clearly incorrect.

    Web 1.0 is about gathering underpants.
    Web 2.0 is a whole bunch of question marks, and
    Web 3.0 is about rolling in cash.

    This could not be more obvious.

    --
    Mike Hoye
  17. Isn't by DulcetTone · · Score: 2, Funny

    Isn't XML the CSV of Y2K?

    tone

    --
    tone
  18. We Got Jay Allard! WOOO! by wild_berry · · Score: 2, Funny

    Watch it, you! I'm working on replacing you with a blooming shell script too! All those buzzwords and you don't really know what you're talking about. Web 3.11 for Workgroups isn't best-of-breed i-enterprise synergy, it's long-view market leader innovation for maximised return on investment across a multi-disciplinary workflow of uncompromising fruity goodness. Please don't undersell the vision, man. And, man, am I buzzed about that vision. Woo!

  19. Re:More like 0.2 than 2.0 by njchick · · Score: 2, Funny

    Web 1.0: The Flash Menace
    Web 2.0: Attack of the AJAX
    Web 3.0: Revenge of the Blog
    Web 4.0: A New Dope
    Web 5.0: The E-commerce Strikes Back
    Web 6.0: Return of the Geek

  20. Re:what's by srpatterson · · Score: 4, Funny

    Despatch war rocket AJAX to bring back his webserver.

    --
    -- The Heineken Uncertainty Principle: You can never be sure how many bears you had last night.