View Poll Results: Is web 2.0 a fad or not?

Voters
15. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, web 2.0 is a passing fad.

    5 33.33%
  • No, web 2.0 is a revolution in Internet interaction

    6 40.00%
  • Maybe...it is too early to say.

    4 26.67%
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 28
  1. #1
    Affiliate Manager MINDsprinter's Avatar
    Join Date
    August 18th, 2006
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Posts
    1,436
    Web 2.0: Fad or Not?
    We've been having a good discussion over here (http://forum.abestweb.com/showthread.php?t=79070) so I wanted to pose a question to the wider community...

    Is the whole web 2.0 thing (sites like digg, facebook, myspace, and others) just a fad or is it a revolution in Internet interaction. Or is it somewhere in between.

    What do you think?

    --Jason
    Jason Rosenbaum
    Affiliate Manager
    MINDsprinting

  2. #2
    ABW Ambassador Snib's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    5,303
    I'd say the prominent web 2.0 sites are certainly here to stay.

    - Scott
    Hatred stirs up strife, But love covers all transgressions.

  3. #3
    Prince of Content Vinny O'Hare's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    3,126
    I am buidling a web 3.0 site as we speak
    Vinny O'Hare - OPM - Contact Info email: vinny at teamloxly.com ~ 702-582-6742 Twitter

  4. #4
    Affiliate Manager MINDsprinter's Avatar
    Join Date
    August 18th, 2006
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Posts
    1,436
    Interesting...do elaborate...or is it a super secret!?
    Jason Rosenbaum
    Affiliate Manager
    MINDsprinting

  5. #5
    Resident Genius and Staunch Capitalist Leader's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    12,817
    IMO

    It's a fad, and not even a very notable one outside the rarified circles of webmasterdom. I think tech-oriented webmasters are really stuck in a yes-loop on this. Like any other yes-loop, certain circles are continually affirming each other's love of it, and ignoring or blocking out contrary evidence.

    If you check some NONtechie, NONbusiness forums, you'll notice that the general populace isn't talking about "Web 2.0." In fact, it doesn't even come up. That speaks against the generalized demand that'd be needed to raise it above cult-hit status.

    If a regular-guy admits to using a site that employs it, he doesn't talk about the tech, but rather the experience of using the site. An experience which a site wouldn't *have to* use Web 2.0 to achieve.

    And, I never hear regular people raving about being able to "tag" things. In fact, if you look at Amazon.com, which has a form of tagging (although it may not qualify as "Web 2.0", you'll see that the few people who bother tagging things at all often come up with such goofy or overly specific tags that they'd be useless. Check out some mass-market items, and you can see some really wierd tags. And a lot of items hardly get any tags. A book I just bought only has 2 tags, although it got lots of reviews.

    *checks the term "crap" in the tag-search, just for kicks*
    Although, contoversial books do seem to draw out many inventive ways to flame them via tags... (scroll down, this page should show all the tags that flame-bait book got) While that example may be useful if the potential consumer's looking at the product description page--almost like 1-and 2-word reviews--it's not worth a darn for those trying to find things based on other peoples' tags.


    Staying-power wise, it's uncool to like what the last bunch of people liked. And "coolness" seems to be the only thing Web 2.0 has going for it--and there's not even a general consensus that it's cool. So I figure it's got plenty of Tamogatchi potential, that is, the potential to make a short-lived but intense splash among its target audience (webmasters who are into coding). I don't see any evidence that Average Joe Surfer gives a hoot about what tech is behind any site, and for it to surpass fad-status there would have to be someone who cared...someone other than people who have site-making as one of their primary interests.
    There is no knowledge that is not power. ~Hemingway

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    78
    Its a good topic for discussion mindsprinter....thanks for posting this thread.

    I must admit, I find it very hard to think of web 2.0 as a `revolution', because it doesn't really offer much that hasn't been done before. Perhaps the main difference is level of sophistication, but that seems to be part of the natural evolution of the web.

    A revolution to me would be offering compeletely new features, such as the hybridisation of web and DVD viewing technolgies (which is in development), or massive advances in bandwidth. And a ton of stuff beyond my limited imagination.

    I guess maybe i just don't understand the term web 2.0 well. But if it was a revolution, i think even I would notice.

  7. #7
    MasterMike HardwareGeek's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    3,810
    every few years there will be a new fab

  8. #8
    Member Tobius's Avatar
    Join Date
    August 16th, 2006
    Location
    Columbus, OH
    Posts
    55
    The original intent of Web 2.0 was actually just to differentiate between old school and new school web development efforts. Somewhere in between that idea and now it's turned into a marketing buzz word. Web 2.0 is not a technology but a way to describe the current evolution of technology as we know it, particularly with regards to the internet.

    But rather than blather on about what we think it is why not start with the source. The term was actually created by O'Reilly over a year ago. Here's an article to help point you in the right direction:

    http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/orei...is-web-20.html

    -tm

  9. #9
    Affiliate Manager
    Join Date
    March 15th, 2006
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    64
    My ABW account is still too young to vote here, but I had to weigh in...

    Fundamentally, "Web 2.0" as a term dated itself the moment it was published. The term is rapidly approaching passe', and will eventually be seen as a fleeting milestone in the development of web culture.

    The concept this term describes (the definition of which is tough to agree on) is a lasting, fundamental shift in the web environment. When the term "web 2.0" is long since dated, the shift itself will remain a constant on this web.

    To me, web 2.0 is about a change in the producer/consumer relationship-- which is driven by new technology to manage these relationships. Where web visitors were once only consumers of web content generated by another party, they are now taking part in the production of this content itself. The web is now socialized, thanks to google, blogging, myspace, digg, youtube, et. al.

    Forums like ABW were always "web 2.0", in that ABW is built on a technology which helps manage relationships. ABW is driven by socialization, through the sharing of content-- everyone here is both a producer and a consumer.

    The web is still in a transition toward mass socialization, and social networks like myspace could perhaps be the greatest proponent toward converting web "consumers" to producers themselves.

    In short, a shared web, a social web, and Open Web, is here to stay-- yet "Web 2.0" will be forgotten. "Open Web", IMO, would have been a much better term...

    -Mike Payne-
    Affiliate Manager
    zZounds.com
    AIM: GearAffiliate
    affiliate@zzounds.com

  10. #10
    Affiliate Manager MINDsprinter's Avatar
    Join Date
    August 18th, 2006
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Posts
    1,436
    Agreed with Mike. Buzzwords are bad, but they sure get people talking no?
    Jason Rosenbaum
    Affiliate Manager
    MINDsprinting

  11. #11
    Action Jackson - King of the World
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    2,201
    Web 2.0 what the hell is that:P

    Seriously tho how many people even know what web 1.0 or web 2.0 is

  12. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    January 12th, 2007
    Posts
    107
    You’d have to define web 1.x to have something to compare it to.
    User interaction: Forums (he he), email group discussions, newsletters, newsgroups, text chat.
    Website design: Flat static html pages.


    My personal “definition” of web2.0 is:

    User interaction – Where the users are participants in the sites. Reviews, voting, blogging. Personal publishing, photo’s, videos, and watching the public reaction to your work. You feel like a part of the site, a participant instead of a spectator.

    Website design: LAMP, CMS systems, and all of the new widgets and gadgets that make pages interactive. (The sliding this and flashing that and popup crap that annoys the hell out of me.)

    This was web 1.0:

    Remember when:
    It was a big deal to get text to format around a picture correctly?
    You’d email your friends to get them to look at the flashing colors you spent all night on?
    You could put your email address on a web page?
    When webmaster@website.com actually replied to emails?
    You used to look forward to opening your email?
    You used to look forward to funny attachments your friends sent?
    You weren’t afraid to surf without having to block-this and disable-that and scan for everything when you finish surfing?

    To me, that was web 1.0

  13. #13
    Full Member OICUAM2's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 18th, 2006
    Location
    Madison, WI
    Posts
    421
    Much more than a fad
    If we are talking about web 2.0, I like it. I used to have sites that did nothing. Now I have sites that do things and allow my visitors to do things. As a non-techie, web 2.0 is a huge revolution for me because it is a whole new set of tools I can employ on my sites.

    If we are talking about user generated content, then I really like it! Seriously, how long have we had to live with monopoly media that tells us what we should know? Now, user generated content allows much more information and debate from a far more diverse groups of publishers and site visitors.

    This is not a fad.

    It is one more huge step in the development of the internet. And a good one when you consider that user generated content is far more supportive of democratic ideals as compared to the monopoly media of the past (and still present).
    Last edited by OICUAM2; January 14th, 2007 at 07:13 PM. Reason: spelling

  14. #14
    Full Member TLE's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 21st, 2005
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    338
    The javascript/data part of 2.0 will continue to evolve for awhile. This is a natural progression of web development, of which the genesis was years ago (screen/page interface & data services).

    Web 2.0, the brand, was a product of the Valley's VC machinery and was promptly propagated by the "please fund me" groupies. Naturally, when you're dealing w/ foo money, things go into the twilight zone. So.. the brand will last until the next brand du jour is anointed.

    For myself, I'm a SEO marketer and most of the 2.0 world does not carry over well to the major spiders. Not for a lack of trying, it's just paradoxical that the benefit is publicity and not applicability.

    I was fortunate to have one of my site named by John Musser of ProgrammableWeb as one of the top 10 popular mashups of 2005 and still receive occasional press inquiry/coverage.

    Tuan

  15. #15
    Influencer Marketing GravityFed's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Ithaca & Park City
    Posts
    3,338
    Those that voted 'Passing Fad'.. have you seen this thread and the featured video clip?

  16. #16
    Affiliate Manager
    Join Date
    January 17th, 2007
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    191
    web 2.0 is here to stay, sites like digg, myspace and other social networks may come and go but interaction is what makes the internet unlike other media forms. The more interaction a website has the more stickiness it will create, ala myspace amazon etc

  17. #17
    ABW Ambassador Snib's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    5,303
    Quote Originally Posted by Gary-AvantLink
    Those that voted 'Passing Fad'.. have you seen this thread and the featured video clip?
    Just watched it, great clip. I like that he didn't talk but typed.

    - Scott
    Hatred stirs up strife, But love covers all transgressions.

  18. #18
    Internet Cowboy
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    4,662
    Given the relative newness of the web and web design parameters being on a constant change, I have to say it is a fad. I think much of it will remain, but isn't everything new on the web a fad at this point? A fad is something that comes along, makes a splash then fades away. I say that this pattern describes every new innovation we have seen over the past 10 years on the web. Not all of the principles that have developed have faded away ie: affiliate marketing is still alive and well, but the methods and practices change constantly, so I have to say it's a fad for that reason.


  19. #19
    Newbie ronaldmarva's Avatar
    Join Date
    February 7th, 2007
    Posts
    205
    Here to stay
    Our affiliates from this segment of the industry (blogges, digg, facebook, myspace, and others) at AffiliateBOt are making a significant contribution to our earning. If we are earning from them, they sure as hell are earning from these facilities. And money is major catalyst for the development and popularity of Web 2.0....these facilities are working for them while they are doing something else.
    Web 2.0 is definitely here to stay!

  20. #20
    Newbie ronaldmarva's Avatar
    Join Date
    February 7th, 2007
    Posts
    205
    web 2.0
    The poll result is quite close! With Web 2.0 as an internet revolution that is here to stay winning by slim margin. Maybe we will just let time be the judge of what is in store for Web 2.0.

  21. #21
    Affiliate Manager Matt McWilliams's Avatar
    Join Date
    July 21st, 2006
    Location
    Fort Wayne, IN
    Posts
    2,838
    I think that web 2.0 is no more of a fad than the internet itself was 10 years ago...or PCs were 20 years ago. Most everything in technology that seemed like a fad is here to stay it seems.

    MySpace?
    YouTube?
    Instant Messenger?

    All of those seemed like fads to me. Now I cannot live without them!
    Matt McWilliams
    Call Me At: (317) 825-8826 | Follow Me On Twitter: @MattMcWilliams2 | Connect With Me On LinkedIn

  22. #22
    ABW Ambassador Paul_Ward's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Cambridgeshire, England
    Posts
    1,573
    The "Fad" part is that it will change everything as we know it.

    Web 2.0 will be here to stay and will suit some sites and not others, but it won't be taking over the world anytime soon.

    Getting other people to write your site for you sounds great in theory, but in practise fizzles out over (a pretty short) time. Some sites and niches will doubtless use it to go from strength to strength, but others won't die just because they don't jump on this particular bandwagon.

  23. #23
    ABW Ambassador Snib's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    5,303
    I think the term "Web 2.0" is the fad. It's just a snappy catchphrase that represents the current state of technology. Regardless of what we call it this is just a natural progression. I certainly believe it's here to stay but it'll continue to evolve until somebody else marks the occasion with another catchy phrase. I prefer to use the terms social software, social media, or social networking. Web 2.0 is just too general a term and can mean just about any type of site under the moon. Everybody will eventually adopt the 2.0ish features as we see more open source projects being released using this new technology. I'm just curious to see what's next after 2.0 becomes the status quo.

    - Scott
    Hatred stirs up strife, But love covers all transgressions.

  24. #24
    Influencer Marketing GravityFed's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Ithaca & Park City
    Posts
    3,338
    Well put Snib.. the phrase is a fad but the evolution/progression is not.

  25. #25
    Member
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    78
    I agree Snib. I personally suspect that the reason people are getting excited about the term `web 2.0', more than other web-related progressions we've experienced, is because, in a rudementary kind of way, `web 2.0' represents a measurable shift towards an `interactive web' ( if only by the high profile of some of the sites implementing parts of these new technologies.)

    Though, in my opinion, the current`web 2.0' `movement' (LOL) seems to be a very immature, experimental phase in the development of an interactive web. We're seeing all kinds of Widgets and applicatons developed, ranging from the useful & Novel, to the really stupid and un-useful. But people are experimenting, and thats all good

    I believe we won't see any real `revolution' in the area of web interactivity until internet bandwidth bottlenecks are overcome.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Great Resources For Learning Web Design And Web Development (Article)
    By Rhia7 in forum Newbie Affiliate FAQs & Helpful Articles
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: February 24th, 2014, 11:44 AM
  2. Is baby adopting by the celebs a new fad now?
    By MoneyBusiness in forum Virtual Family and Off-Topic
    Replies: 40
    Last Post: October 25th, 2006, 07:39 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •