5 thoughts on We’re Still Defining Web 2.0

  1. Hi Jeff:

    The Internet is definitely in the middle of transformation; we have so much content/data, but no we of accessing it. By talking about where we are at, we can try to reckon where we are going. Plus, we’ve experienced such a sharp increasing in emerging technologies that we have to sort of figure out what we are going to do with all of it. Ultimately, “Web 2.0” is just a term of reference to describe this period of growth!

    Thanks for the link.


  2. Pingback NoteSake « Ethald’s Weblog
  3. I hear a lot of discussion around defining Web 2.0; I think simpler definition is better such as “user based collaboration and content generation”. There are a number of people who want a clear cut definition on exactly what Web 2.0 is and everything encompassed by Web 2.0. This is analogous to asking for a list of every animal that exist now or has ever exist before they are willing to talk about dogs or buffalo. Even today new species are being discovered. If I may barrow the famous words of the late Supreme Court Justice Potter Steward, “I may not be able to fine it, but I know it when I see it.” Web 2.0 is still growing and evolving this is why it is still so hard to define.

    The biggest issue facing Web 2.0 is not technology. Most of the technology used in Web 2.0 has been around for quite some time. It is the application of this technology which is special. Here is the analogy I use for those who say that there is nothing new in Web 2.0. Using this approach one could argue that there is no such thing as a democratic state. That before the 1700s there were people, states, and governments and democracy is just made of these three elements. Well, we know that it is not the elements but their application which is different.

    Craig Tobias
    Solutions Architect
    Cisco Systems.

  4. Pingback crazy multiplayer casino online

Comments are closed