The new buzz about Web 2.0, is it all just blowing smoke? Check out the photogallery.
Your thoughts....
Your thoughts....
Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!
Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations IamaSherpa on being selected by the Tek-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
Web 2.0 - Your thoughts?
- Thread starter dennisbbb
- Start date
From the look of things - based on that article - it appears to me that the predicitions are more realistic than any similar ones I have seen in the past. With the web becoming a whole lot more portable these days (in handhelds, phones and laptops), and the availability of the web (whether it be at an outdoor cafe via wi-fi or a cellular providers solution) -- storing and accessing data from a web enabled device (especially one that is not your personal device), is more convienient than ever. As a matter of fact, I beleive that if we continue on this path, we will be carrying around "web access devices" (with little or no self-contained storage) - and we be able to access all of our data, contacts, forms, documents, etc. from one or two web locations. While this does bring up an issue of "privacy and security" and "do we own our own information or do the portals own it" and "what happens when / if the portals go out of business", etc. I think the attractiveness of having this data available wherever we go, whenever we need it - without having to lug equipment all over the place - will be a dream come true, especially for those who travel extensively for a living.
dilettante
MIS
I suspect the market reality is different.
Those trying to sell video and music to the cellphone are already seeing consumer resistance they never expected.
It's a bit like predicting in 1980 that "in the future" everyone would carry around small TVs. It didn't turn out quite that way for lots of reasons: too-small screens, cable TV vs over-the-air quality and content, VHS then DVDs, etc. If you are on the go and you really need to see that ballgame you just find a sports bar.
What was that hoary old TLA standard for "the web for portables" we no longer remember? WAP I think.
"Web 2.0" is over 2 years old now as a marketing buzzphrase, originating with O'Reilly Media execs as I recall. Some people lump it in with AJAX, a goofy term for Microsoft's Remote Scripting dating back to 1998. What changed? The non-IE browser scene gained a few of IE's capabilities!
It's basically an anti-Windows marketing pitch that hopes to draw on anti-Microsoft sentiments. The idea is to try to use the web browser as something with a more interactive experience. This is supposed to replace desktop software with centralized software accessed via "web terminals.
Those trying to sell video and music to the cellphone are already seeing consumer resistance they never expected.
It's a bit like predicting in 1980 that "in the future" everyone would carry around small TVs. It didn't turn out quite that way for lots of reasons: too-small screens, cable TV vs over-the-air quality and content, VHS then DVDs, etc. If you are on the go and you really need to see that ballgame you just find a sports bar.
What was that hoary old TLA standard for "the web for portables" we no longer remember? WAP I think.
"Web 2.0" is over 2 years old now as a marketing buzzphrase, originating with O'Reilly Media execs as I recall. Some people lump it in with AJAX, a goofy term for Microsoft's Remote Scripting dating back to 1998. What changed? The non-IE browser scene gained a few of IE's capabilities!
It's basically an anti-Windows marketing pitch that hopes to draw on anti-Microsoft sentiments. The idea is to try to use the web browser as something with a more interactive experience. This is supposed to replace desktop software with centralized software accessed via "web terminals.
MasterRacker
New member
I think a lot of the resistance dilettante mentions is due to hideous overpricing of the services. I have a new phone with a 320x240 screen that you really could watch TV on except that I don't have the small fortune necessary to pay for it.
Personally, I think "Web 2.0" is marketing hype. I would hope by now that "everything is going to change and if you don't agree then you just don't get it" was debunked by the forst dotcom boom/bust. Maybe not - we'll see.
In an interesting cooincidence of timing here's John Dvorak's take:
_____
Jeff
[small][purple]It's never too early to begin preparing for [/purple]International Talk Like a Pirate Day
"The software I buy sucks, The software I write sucks. It's time to give up and have a beer..." - Me[/small]
Personally, I think "Web 2.0" is marketing hype. I would hope by now that "everything is going to change and if you don't agree then you just don't get it" was debunked by the forst dotcom boom/bust. Maybe not - we'll see.
In an interesting cooincidence of timing here's John Dvorak's take:
_____
Jeff
[small][purple]It's never too early to begin preparing for [/purple]International Talk Like a Pirate Day
"The software I buy sucks, The software I write sucks. It's time to give up and have a beer..." - Me[/small]
- Thread starter
- #5
Great article.
The world progresses in convergence; however, only to a point. There are always new devices and new ideas, but as time progress, these new things will become old. Who is to put a lable on this progression?
What is Web 2.0? Web 3.0? or Web 4.0? Before anyone can say "we are here", it is already too late and out of date.
The world progresses in convergence; however, only to a point. There are always new devices and new ideas, but as time progress, these new things will become old. Who is to put a lable on this progression?
What is Web 2.0? Web 3.0? or Web 4.0? Before anyone can say "we are here", it is already too late and out of date.
dilettante
MIS
Those "new services" always seem to come with a shameless level of profiteering after you get past the pioneering. Funny, one would think the necessary creativity and initial build-out costs would be the expensive part, not the commodity stage.
Look at cable TV, broadband Internet access, and many other service technologies. These were pretty cheap during the early stages, but prices rise to meet every drop of resources. For the same service you can get cable TV for a fraction of its western prices in India and other places. Cell phone service seems like an endless effort to grab ever more money from consumers' pocketbooks.
One group busts its butt to introduce something, then gets squeezed out by the "money men" who milk it to the max. This in spite of the fact that things of this nature get cheaper to provide as the market grows and the technology matures.
The need for profitability is obvious if one wants such efforts to be undertaken privately. The question I have is why the levels of profit have to increase continuously over time? Of course the system works better when anti-competitive forces are muzzled. Communications is just one arena where monopolies and duopolies (and mergers/acquisitions that threaten same) have been allowed to run wild with minimal regulation of late though.
Look at cable TV, broadband Internet access, and many other service technologies. These were pretty cheap during the early stages, but prices rise to meet every drop of resources. For the same service you can get cable TV for a fraction of its western prices in India and other places. Cell phone service seems like an endless effort to grab ever more money from consumers' pocketbooks.
One group busts its butt to introduce something, then gets squeezed out by the "money men" who milk it to the max. This in spite of the fact that things of this nature get cheaper to provide as the market grows and the technology matures.
The need for profitability is obvious if one wants such efforts to be undertaken privately. The question I have is why the levels of profit have to increase continuously over time? Of course the system works better when anti-competitive forces are muzzled. Communications is just one arena where monopolies and duopolies (and mergers/acquisitions that threaten same) have been allowed to run wild with minimal regulation of late though.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Question
- Locked
- Question