Group items tagged

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.

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. 

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 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

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."

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