[Air-l] how to pin down web 2.0

[danah boyd]

I would violently disagree with this categorization.  Web1.0 was the  
boom where companies sold fiction to venture capitalists and walked  
out like bandits.  The vast majority of what is categorized as Web2.0  
was built in the rubble of the crash.  There is no doubt that the  
last year has involved numerous buyouts by large corporations but the  
vast majority of Web2.0 apps were built in total startup mode without  
an eye for business, with a focus on people like the creators, and  
with zero market research.  Blogger, LJ, Friendster, MySpace,  
Facebook, LinkedIn, YouTube, Wikipedia, Flickr, Socialtext,  
Upcoming, ...  these are not big corporate projects, even if they've  
been bought or expanded beyond their britches.  With big megacorps  
embracing Web2.0, funny things are happening, but that's not the crux  
of what this term is signaling.


On Apr 20, 2007, at 3:56 PM, Alexis Turner wrote:

> In other words, Web 1.0 was something created by individuals, and  
> Web 2.0 is the
> Web through the lens of business, user-leveraged experience, and  
> market drive
> research.
> -Alexis
>
>
> On Fri, 20 Apr 2007, Lane DeNicola wrote:
>
> ::Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2007 18:11:50 -0400
> ::From: Lane DeNicola <denicola at alum.rpi.edu>
> ::Reply-To: air-l at listserv.aoir.org
> ::To: air-l at listserv.aoir.org
> ::Subject: Re: [Air-l] how to pin down web 2.0
> ::
> ::Mark Warschaur mentioned O'Reilly Media as the cited progenitor  
> of the
> ::term Web 2.0, and I'd argue Tim O'Reilly's (rather lengthy) 2005
> ::article--appropriately titled "What is Web 2.0?"--is probably still
> ::the best general source on the concept:
> ::
> ::http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/what- 
> is-web-20.html
> ::
> ::According to the concept as built there, Alex Halavais is  
> effectively
> ::right, that the term denotes "companies that have attracted  
> funding or
> ::make money on the web over the last few years," but also that "it
> ::suggests some kind of breaking point with earlier approaches to
> ::design," to wit:
> ::
> ::"In exploring the seven principles above, we've highlighted some of
> ::the principal features of Web 2.0. Each of the examples we've  
> explored
> ::demonstrates one or more of those key principles, but may miss  
> others.
> ::Let's close, therefore, by summarizing what we believe to be the  
> core
> ::competencies of Web 2.0 companies:
> ::
> ::    * Services, not packaged software, with cost-effective  
> scalability
> ::    * Control over unique, hard-to-recreate data sources that get
> ::richer as more people use them
> ::    * Trusting users as co-developers
> ::    * Harnessing collective intelligence
> ::    * Leveraging the long tail through customer self-service
> ::    * Software above the level of a single device
> ::    * Lightweight user interfaces, development models, AND  
> business models
> ::
> ::The next time a company claims that it's "Web 2.0," test their
> ::features against the list above. The more points they score, the  
> more
> ::they are worthy of the name. Remember, though, that excellence in  
> one
> ::area may be more telling than some small steps in all seven."
> ::
> ::I'd advocate the use of the term, if only because of its circulation
> ::as industry vernacular, but its use should be well-qualified.  As a
> ::fluid construct (one used here to designate "companies with certain
> ::competencies," rather than, say, qualities of specific technologies)
> ::perhaps the best course would be to qualify it as "O'Reilly's (or
> ::whomever's) conceptualization of Web 2.0."
> ::
> ::--
> ::Lane DeNicola
> ::Doctoral Candidate | Dept. of Science & Technology Studies
> ::Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
> ::http://www.nacresky.com/lad
> ::Tried the Science Studies Search Engine? <http://www.nacresky.com/ 
> ssse>
> ::_______________________________________________
> ::The air-l at listserv.aoir.org mailing list
> ::is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http:// 
> aoir.org
> ::Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http:// 
> listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
> ::
> ::Join the Association of Internet Researchers:
> ::http://www.aoir.org/
> ::
> _______________________________________________
> The air-l at listserv.aoir.org mailing list
> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org
> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http:// 
> listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
>
> Join the Association of Internet Researchers:
> http://www.aoir.org/

- - - - - - - - - - d a n a h ( d o t ) o r g - - - - - - - - - -
"taken out of context i must seem so strange"

musings :: http://www.zephoria.org/thoughts