Evolution of the Web before Web 2.0

While the Internet started growing decades earlier, it was the release of the first Mosaic web browser that heralded in a new revolution. Though it reached its peak in less than ten years, the era of Web 1.0 will be long remembered as a turning point in human society. As we are still deep in the midst of all of the change it is easy to overlook just how profound the Internet revolution really is.

Web 1.0 was the great equalizer. It put everyone on the same playing field. A single individual sitting at a computer in the remotest region of the globe had the ability to publish as easily and as widely as the largest newspapers. While it has taken several years to get to the point where this has become commonplace (for reasons that may be explained in defining Web 2.0), even the earliest days of the web turned the conventions on their head. From private citizens like Matt Drudge to garage startups like Amazon.com, Web 1.0 was the beginning of an era in which the smallest player on the field could have just as much impact as the largest conventional institution.

Yet the technology of Web 1.0 was simultaneously both ground-breaking and surprisingly traditional. It was ground-breaking in the sense that it reduced the cost of data distribution to nearly nothing. Yet it was traditional in the sense that it generally followed the model of the printing press. (Albeit with very, very inexpensive machinery.) It allowed anyone to run their own printing press, and it removed the middle man from the distribution process. Web 1.0 was a revolution in which hundreds of millions of consumers found their way to millions of new producers.

“Web 2.0 can be defined as “the philosophy of mutually maximizing collective intelligence and added value for each participant by formalized and dynamic information sharing and creation.”

Web 1.5 is where the information is conveyed differently by the industry practitioner, but the industry practitioner doesn’t understand that .5 of the “added value” comes from the commenter who disagrees with the post or adds more info than the post itself conveys

WEB 1.0 is a commercial - a one sided mirror. WEB 2.0 is an exchange of ideas where the general public is not the “reader” only, or the one “information is conveyed TO“, but the most important part of the information process and where the “added value” comes from.

Was ist Web 2.0? WEB 2.0 ist keine Programmier- oder Scriptsprache, es ist auch keine Datenbank oder irgend eine andere Software oder Hardware. Nein, WEB 2.0 ist mehr eine logische Sache. Ein Oberbegriff für neue Techniken, Design, Darstellung, Anteilnahme, Veröffentlichung, Austausch und Sozialisierung im Internet.

WEB 2.0 bedeutet für mich Veränderung!

Mit WEB 1.0 wurde das Internet erst richtig populär. Aus dieser Zeit stammen die einfachen statischen WebSeiten, wie es heute noch viele gibt. Es war eine reine Einwegkommunikation, d.h. vom Betreiber der Seite werden Infomationen angeboten und die Nutzer können diese lesen.

Web 0.5 Die Zeit vor dem WWW. Von 1988-1995, also kurz bevor das WWW populär wurde, diente das Internet hauptsächlich der E-Mail und Datenkommunikation.

Web 1.0 Das Web 1.0 ist das Web von 1996. Statisches HTML, reine Einwegkommunikation, klassische Websites.

Web 1.5 Im Web 1.5, entstanden zur Dotcom-Zeit zwischen 1996 und 2001, wurden die Websites dynamisch. Es ging im Wesentlichen um Hits & Eyeballs (Seitenabrufe) und visuelle Ästhethik. Interaktive Websites waren meist Shops, Communities oder Foren und immer Insellösungen, da um User gekämpft wurde. Die verwendeten Technologien waren teuer und speziell (CMS, Community Software, Personalisierung, E-Commerce) und die User hatten nur eingeschränkt die Möglichkeit, eigene Inhalte zu veröffentlichen.

Web 2.5 will be about creating safe, supportive, and effective places for structured collaboration to take place: "Safe" will mean not only that information contributors are protected by mechanisms that insure that "only people who should see x, see x", but also that there are mechanisms to appropriately build trust in those contributors among consumers of the information.  Seller ratings on eBay are the poster child for what's meant here.  A prediction -- we're bound to see, at some point, a "portable online credibility profile service" that is analogous to a financial credit rating.  People with an interest in being perceived to be credible online will register their personas on different sites with a third-party service, credibility ratings of these personas will be aggregated (scraped or parsed at minimum if APIs or RSS extension feeds aren't there for this), and as liquidity builds in such a service, sites will incorporate this into their platforms (as Truste vouches for the security of a site, these services will vouch for the reputations of participants in a site).  At an even more technical level, platforms must and will evolve to support complex "subsite" structures with sophisticated permissioning schemes.  .LRN provides a good example of an advanced architecture for this. "Supportive" will mean that both contribution and consumption of information is coached and encouraged.  Assuming "safe", many more people could be using blogs to share information to their own and their colleagues' and friends' benefit, but they may feel awkward or unsure about Why/ what/ how.  Well designed applications will provide not just "defense-in-depth" help mechanisms for when people have problems, but more extensive tours and ongoing coaching for users as they progress from new to more experienced in their familiarity with the system.  For example, earlier incarnations of the ArsDigita Community System featured a "Curriculum System" module to help people track what they've already learned and what they still need to know to use a system effectively (See http://philip.greenspun.com/doc/curriculum.html). "Effective" will mean that the contribution and consumption of information in applications is made both simple and obvious.  Applications like our restaurant review experiment are especially useful because the information is easy to contribute (the provided structure prompts, but is flexible enough to accomodate orthogonal descriptions) and consume (the data can be viewed geospatially on the map, or via different sort options).

In summary, for me Web 1.5 was all about the realization that the real value of the Web for business lies in supporting and leveraging collaboration, not simply opening up a new channel for transaction.  The keys to doing this well:  focus "communities" on high-value exchanges; structure communities so logical subgroups based on powerful affinities can be created maintained, and easily extended -- not only by site sponsors, but by community members as well; support users through the "why" and the "what" of collaborating, not just the "how"; and, make contribution and consumption of the information as easy as possible. 

Fraktale Marke, Prosuming, Communities, User Generated Content, 1:1 waren die Buzzwords der 90er. Heute ist es Web 2.0. Absolut. Der entscheidende Unterschied - letzteres passiert heute tatsächlich, während das, was in den 90ern Buzzword war, damals auch genau das blieb: Buzzword, mehr nicht.

Das war ja der große Traum der 90er: die Leute finden sich da zusammen, wo ihr relevanter Content ist. D.h. das Targeting der entsprechenden Werbung und direkt im Anschluss Sales (also sofortige "Conversion", damit harte Messbarkeit) sind kein Problem mehr. Dazu kommt, dass das Internet jetzt deutlich verbreiteter und außerdem breitbandiger ist als damals, dass also viele Heilsversprechen jetzt erst eingelöst werden können.

die enormen Marketingausgaben, die in den 90ern für die Verbreitung dieser "Produkte" aufgewendet wurden, nicht mehr nötig sind - die Konsumenten erzeugen so viel Content im Netz und sorgen für so viel Verbreitung, dass die Online Mundpropaganda heute hilft, profitabel zu sein, wo die massiven Marketingausgaben damals ins Leere geführt haben

Hype 1.0 (die Erstkommerzialisierung des Internets 1996-2001)

Das Internet wird pragmatisch für die eigenen Interessen genutzt und nicht fassungslos angegeglotzt. Eine Technik ist in der Mitte der Gesellschaft angekommen.

4. Verzicht auf teure Werbung Erinnern Sie sich noch an 500-Seiten-dicke Magazine vor der CeBIT? Darin wurde das Anzeigengeld der New-Economy versenkt. Heute gilt der Spruch: Wenn es Werbung braucht, ist es kein Web 2.0. Alle erfolgreichen Geschäftsmodelle im Web 2.0 haben sich viral durchgesetzt, nicht durch Anzeigenstrecken.

For example this is a pretty good explanation of the transition from Web 1.0 to Web 2.0: "The original conception of the web (in this context, labeled Web 1.0) comprised static HTML pages that were updated rarely, if at all. The success of the dot-com era depended on a more dynamic web (sometimes labeled Web 1.5) where content management systems served dynamic XHTML web pages created on the fly from an ever-changing content database. In both senses, so-called eyeballing was considered intrinsic to the web experience, thus making page hits and visual aesthetics important factors.

Web 2.0 is 'The Web as Platform' and the Semantic Web is 'The Web of Meaning'.

Proponents of the Web 2.0 approach believe that web usage is increasingly oriented toward interaction and rudimentary social networks, which can serve content that exploits network effects with or without creating a visual, interactive web page. In one view, Web 2.0 sites act more as points of presence, or user-dependent web portals, than as traditional websites."

Was ist das Web 1.0? Die numerische Bezeichnung stammt aus der Software-Entwicklung und bezeichnet die jeweilige Version eines Programms. Kleinere Entwicklungsstufen werden in Zehntelschritten benannt, größere in ganzen Zahlen. Web 2.0 bezeichnet demnach eine grundlegend weiterentwickelte Version des Web 1.0 – einen qualitativen Sprung. Und hier beginnt der Expertenstreit: Verbirgt sich hinter Web 2.0 tatsächlich etwas grundlegend Neues oder bezeichnet es schon immer Dagewesenes?

Als Web 1.0 fungierte das Internet in seinen Anfangszeiten als eine weitgehend kostenlose interaktive Kommunikationsplattform, auf der sich vornehmlich Wissenschaftler(innen) austauschten. Websites und deren Inhalte waren größtenteils statisch. Das hat sich im Laufe der Jahre grundlegend geändert: Heute reicht der Kreis der Nutzer(innen) weit über die Gruppe der Wissenschaftler(innen) hinaus, gut die Hälfte der Bevölkerung ist inzwischen regelmäßig online. Auch die Angebotsstruktur hat sich verschoben, es dominieren zusehends kommerzielle Anwendungen. Weit verbreitet sind dynamische HMTL-Seiten, die mittels Datenbanken und Content-Management-Systemen verwaltet und aktualisiert werden. Hierdurch wechseln die Inhalte deutlich häufiger, als es anfangs der Fall war. Viele bezeichnen diesen Zustand als Web 1.5, da sich die Rollen der an der Onlinekommunikation Beteiligten gegenüber den Anfangstagen des Web 1.0 kaum verändert haben: Einige wenige – die „Sender“ – beherrschen die Technik der Onlinepublikation, während die meisten Nutzer(innen) als „Empfänger“ die Inhalte primär empfangen und konsumieren.

Im Web 2.0 kann jeder auch „Sender“ werden

What's especially interesting to me is that it really hasn't changed much.  In 2001, he co-wrote an article that talked about the importance of supporting and leveraging the interaction around transactions - collaboration.  Specifically about online communities, "...online communities are not quickly built, and require care and feeding to thrive."  He points out that many died on the wire - no pun intended.  He also says, "...the lessons were not in whether "online communities" were good ideas, but rather in how they were implemented.

Blogger erst Web 1.5

Web 1.0 – Centralised Them. Web 2.0 – Distributed Us. Web 3.0 – Decentralised Me

Web 1.0 turned into a broadcast medium. It was all about them. A case of industrial age thinking applied to a new landscape.

Web 2.0, largely based on an analysis of what worked in Web1.0, is an alignment with TBL’s initial vision of the Web. The Web as connective tissue between us. Platform, participation and conversation. Really it is more than the Web. It is the Internet. It is new practices too. Ultimately it is about connectivity; applying constrains in the form of some sort-of agreed upon standards that make it easier to talk to one another. With new layers of connective wealth come new tools. In Web2.0’s case that allowed new forms of communication. With it associated ‘acceptable’ business models – hence the Google economy.

Distributed objects are the very heart of the Web, and have been since its invention.

HTTP

Uniform Resource Locator

Web 3.0, expected to debut in 2007,

December 17, 2006

Web 3.0 might be defined as a third-generation of the Web enabled by the convergence of several key emerging technology trends

We all know how Web 2.0 stands ahead from classic, so called Web 1.0. It is all collective Intelligence and transforming Web from a Displaying platform to a Delivering Platform.

“Web 2.0 is Web by the users, to the users and for the users.”

In previous era we molded web as a delivering platform, now its the time to organize, customize and improvise. Everything will evolve around these three things.