Web 2.0
I was asked the other day, whether I knew when Web2.0 will be going live, almost as if it was going to be launched with a big bang, maybe like Windows Vista, with a lot of media hype, magazine features, television adverts etc.
I explained that Web2.0 was already ‘live’, and no longer had I said that, I back tracked and explained that although it was ‘live’, it wasn’t. I thought how could something be ’live’ when a consesnus on its exact meaning hasn’t even been reached? Things like this put me in the same state of mind as I experienced while watching Donnie Darko – a very confused state!
Although no consensus has been reached, it is regarded that Web2.0 represents the future of internet, for example data sharing. By this I mean Wiki’s and Blogs, but as it hasn’t been officially branded yet, it must also encompass future terms and technologies, those that haven’t even been invented or thought of yet. In this scenario, Web2.0 isn’t ‘live’ as such, but is evolving.
The term Web2.0 was popularised during web development conferences in October 2004 and in a nutshell represents the constantly changing rules and evolving business models we see today. It’s basically a buzz word meaning whatever is new or newly popular on the web such as tags and podcasting. In this case we are making use of Web2.0 now and I guess as we continue to develop and new services gain popularity we will continue to do so in the future. So where does that leave Web3.0? Will there ever be such a thing if Web2.0 encompasses new popular bits and pieces in the future?
I have read up on Web2.0, seen presentations and listened to a few speaches, and at times, I come the conclusion that Web2.0 is an individual thing. To me, putting it in lamen there are 3 main areas represented by the term Web2.0;
- RIA – rich internet applications such as YouTube or Flickr. Anything that makes use of Flash or Ajax can be considered RIA.
- SOA – service orientated architecture, by this I mean feeds and webservices. Things that expose their functionaly so other applications can make use of them.
- SW – social web. This is the most commonly thought of when talking about Web2.0, representing end user interaction such as tagging and podcasts.
Whats this got to do with Affiliate Marketing?
Well, nothing really, its just something that I find going round and round in my head 
I sometimes think that us affiliates were one of the first to make use of, or introduce Web2.0 by way of our websites, comparison engines, or communities.
When creating a website we, the affiliates, had the choice of adding a static 468×60 banner for a particular product or a particular website which I see as being as Web1.0. With the introduction of Google Adsense, I think we crossed over to Web.20 as Google Adsense looks at the content of a website, making use of SOA, and displays adverts that are relevant to the content of that particular page.
Obviously as time has moved on, more and more of us are making use of XML and RSS in our blogs, or using feeds from merchants to show particular products or services, again based on the content of the page loaded.
As I said earlier, personally I see Web2.0 being an individual thing. What one person may perceive to be Web2.0 others may think differently. Thank goodness that is off my chest and I can now get some sleep!
2 Comments
Leave a Reply
Social Stuff
Good post. “I can’t define porn, but I know it when I see it”.
I know a lot of smart people who don’t agree on what web 2.o means. For me personally, I say most people get too hung up on defining the technology that will drive it and too little time romancing the philosophy that makes it worth driving. For me Web 2.o is increased user user interaction and many to many, relationship based information processing.
At its most basic level, by this definition web 2.o existed before the web, back when the old BBS networks like FIDO were all about peer to peer sharing and user interaction. We lost site of that for a while in the rush to build ever increasing technological wow extractors, but now we’re coming back to it, with more tech behind us and our biggest difficulty is in fully understanding that the tech is just the vehicle. The passengers are where the cool stuff is.
Hi Dane, glad you liked the article, it was one of those brain dumbs in the wee hours. The type that makes sense when your fingers are typing, and then after re-readnig it, you’re no longer sure if the meaning has been xxxx.
I agree with the vehicle and passengers theory, however in the past, I’ve tried explaining that to a few people, and it either confused them or they got bored extremely quickly
It’s intereseting to see that you go as far as thinking of the BBS networks (those were the days) being Web2.0, before the WWW as we know appeared and well before the term Web2.0 was even coined!