Tags |
|
|
Links |
|
|
Added for You - Web 2.0: Is It Just Hype?
Software as a Service (SaaS) is the new generation of ASP model designed to reduce the exorbitant costs of specialized medical practice management software. SaaS model is available for all aspects of medical practice management, including scheduling, billing, and electronic medical records (EMR), which are mission-critical for high quality clinical service, business operations, and regulatory compliance. SaaS model extends the advantages of Application Service Provider (ASP) model, which in turn evolves from the traditional Cli
The term isn't important. It's about seeing a change in the Web as users enjoy more real-time control and participation while connecting to each other through many means. So to heck with the "label" and just know the Web is growing up and a lot of things are happening in terms of the advances made to make it a more interactive experience that puts the user in the driver's seat.
"The term Web 2.0 particularly bugs me. It's not a real concept. It has no meaning. It's a big, vague, nebulous cloud of pure architectural nothingness," writes Joel Spolsky of Joel on Software [3].
Vander Wal says, "There is more hype in Web 2.0 than great steps forward."
Amen.
[1] http://www.vanderwal.net/essays/pic/050715/
[2] http://ricksegal.typepad.com/pmv/2005/10/web_20_a_che
Creativity can be defined as problem identification and idea generation whilst innovation can be defined as idea selection, development and commercialisation.There are other useful definitions in this field, for example, creativity can be defined as consisting of a number of ideas, a number of diverse ideas and a number of novel ideas.There are distinct processes that enhance problem identification and idea generation and, similarly, distinct processes that enhance idea selection, development and commercialisation.
Is it just another term that Web experts and personalities are spreading to drum up followers and business? If nothing else, many (resources at the end of the article plus we'll skip quoting the ones that have been quoted a hundred times already) agree the Web is still maturing and it's changing from "I go get" to "come to me," says Thomas Vander Wal[1].
The term is hype. That is all it is. Hype. Cry and scream, if you want, but the Web can't have a label like this. It's not a project with a start and finish timeline. It evolves. When the first phone came to be, it didn't get names like Phone 1.0 or Phone BC (before cell). The phone industry involved and now the lines are blurring between phones and Internet connections, even cable television.
But, the thoughts and ideas behind it are important.
Poster children for 2.0
The Web is no longer static and one-way — visitors read content and play no role. Instead, we're seeing users who participate and connect to each other using services as opposed to Web sites. Applications are no longer limited to desktops or even the Web site itself as more Web-based applications come out.
Sites are becoming more interactive so users aren't simply sitting and watching the Web go by. They can do something with the content they see, even if it's not their own and it happens instantly.
Zimbra, Netvibes, Writely, CalendarHub, ObjectGraph Dictionary, TuDu, and a Periodic Table of the Elements are examples of two-way communication that occur in real-time. Go to these sites and play with them. It should be easy to see why these (and few other obvious that don't need another mention) are the epitome of where the Web is going.
Repeating themes
In most Web 2.0 articles, the following are recurring themes:
*Semantic markup.
*XML.
*Portable content - content crosses paths, appears in multiple places, and connects.
*Users get real-time control.
*Adding metadata, tags, keywords to anything and everything.
Content can go anywhere thanks to RSS feeds and API (application program interface). Feeds allow people to subscribe to a Web site's content or port them into their own Web sites or mobile devices. Google, Amazon, and eBay have APIs to let developers build applications that use these Web site's tools. An example of API is adding a Google map to your Web site that shows how to get to your location.
All of these are indicators of the big steps forward we're seeing on the Web. They should not be grouped and labeled.
I still don't get it. What is 2.0?
Forget Web 2.0, but not what it represents.
It represents the change in how people and information interact on the Web. It represents designers and developers are thinking about how people use information and that users add value. It represents different approaches for making this happen.
To be honest, writing this article has been difficult. Read the many definitions of Web 2.0 on the Web and no two say the same thing. It's yet another buzzword. As Rick Segal writes in his post on the topic, "Don't look for the buzz words to get you into the game or get you a check."
The term isn't important. It's about seeing a change in the Web as users enjoy more real-time control and participation while connecting to each other through many means. So to heck with the "label" and just know the Web is growing up and a lot of things are happening in terms of the advances made to make it a more interactive experience that puts the user in the driver's seat.
"The term Web 2.0 particularly bugs me. It's not a real concept. It has no meaning. It's a big, vague, nebulous cloud of pure architectural nothingness," writes Joel Spolsky of Joel on Software [3].
Vander Wal says, "There is more hype in Web 2.0 than great steps forward."
Amen.
[1] http://www.vanderwal.net/essays/pic/050715/
[2] http://ricksegal.typepad.com/pmv/2005/10/web_20_a_chec
Recognizing that the time had come to replace our hot water heater, my wife called our plumber to schedule an appointment. She placed the call at about 11 a.m. When the agent asked, “Would you be available between one and three?” Lori asked, “Which day?” The agent replied “Today of course.”Hearing a strange noise coming from our furnace, another call was placed. Again, the appointment was made and the problem was solved the same day. (Are you surprised that the furnace and the plumbing company have the same ownership?)<
But, the thoughts and ideas behind it are important.
Poster children for 2.0
The Web is no longer static and one-way — visitors read content and play no role. Instead, we're seeing users who participate and connect to each other using services as opposed to Web sites. Applications are no longer limited to desktops or even the Web site itself as more Web-based applications come out.
Sites are becoming more interactive so users aren't simply sitting and watching the Web go by. They can do something with the content they see, even if it's not their own and it happens instantly.
Zimbra, Netvibes, Writely, CalendarHub, ObjectGraph Dictionary, TuDu, and a Periodic Table of the Elements are examples of two-way communication that occur in real-time. Go to these sites and play with them. It should be easy to see why these (and few other obvious that don't need another mention) are the epitome of where the Web is going.
Repeating themes
In most Web 2.0 articles, the following are recurring themes:
*Semantic markup.
*XML.
*Portable content - content crosses paths, appears in multiple places, and connects.
*Users get real-time control.
*Adding metadata, tags, keywords to anything and everything.
Content can go anywhere thanks to RSS feeds and API (application program interface). Feeds allow people to subscribe to a Web site's content or port them into their own Web sites or mobile devices. Google, Amazon, and eBay have APIs to let developers build applications that use these Web site's tools. An example of API is adding a Google map to your Web site that shows how to get to your location.
All of these are indicators of the big steps forward we're seeing on the Web. They should not be grouped and labeled.
I still don't get it. What is 2.0?
Forget Web 2.0, but not what it represents.
It represents the change in how people and information interact on the Web. It represents designers and developers are thinking about how people use information and that users add value. It represents different approaches for making this happen.
To be honest, writing this article has been difficult. Read the many definitions of Web 2.0 on the Web and no two say the same thing. It's yet another buzzword. As Rick Segal writes in his post on the topic, "Don't look for the buzz words to get you into the game or get you a check."
The term isn't important. It's about seeing a change in the Web as users enjoy more real-time control and participation while connecting to each other through many means. So to heck with the "label" and just know the Web is growing up and a lot of things are happening in terms of the advances made to make it a more interactive experience that puts the user in the driver's seat.
"The term Web 2.0 particularly bugs me. It's not a real concept. It has no meaning. It's a big, vague, nebulous cloud of pure architectural nothingness," writes Joel Spolsky of Joel on Software [3].
Vander Wal says, "There is more hype in Web 2.0 than great steps forward."
Amen.
[1] http://www.vanderwal.net/essays/pic/050715/
[2] http://ricksegal.typepad.com/pmv/2005/10/web_20_a_che
Starting a business is like starting your own baseball team. Start-up (Spring training) is when you are doing your research, deciding on a business name, zoning requirements, setting up your business, deciding on what form your business will take (sole proprietorship, corporation, LLC). You're assembling all the parts of your business (team), getting ready for the season (your opening day). Once spring training is over, and the season begins (your business is open) you start making your run around the bases. Getting to fi
Repeating themes
In most Web 2.0 articles, the following are recurring themes:
*Semantic markup.
*XML.
*Portable content - content crosses paths, appears in multiple places, and connects.
*Users get real-time control.
*Adding metadata, tags, keywords to anything and everything.
Content can go anywhere thanks to RSS feeds and API (application program interface). Feeds allow people to subscribe to a Web site's content or port them into their own Web sites or mobile devices. Google, Amazon, and eBay have APIs to let developers build applications that use these Web site's tools. An example of API is adding a Google map to your Web site that shows how to get to your location.
All of these are indicators of the big steps forward we're seeing on the Web. They should not be grouped and labeled.
I still don't get it. What is 2.0?
Forget Web 2.0, but not what it represents.
It represents the change in how people and information interact on the Web. It represents designers and developers are thinking about how people use information and that users add value. It represents different approaches for making this happen.
To be honest, writing this article has been difficult. Read the many definitions of Web 2.0 on the Web and no two say the same thing. It's yet another buzzword. As Rick Segal writes in his post on the topic, "Don't look for the buzz words to get you into the game or get you a check."
The term isn't important. It's about seeing a change in the Web as users enjoy more real-time control and participation while connecting to each other through many means. So to heck with the "label" and just know the Web is growing up and a lot of things are happening in terms of the advances made to make it a more interactive experience that puts the user in the driver's seat.
"The term Web 2.0 particularly bugs me. It's not a real concept. It has no meaning. It's a big, vague, nebulous cloud of pure architectural nothingness," writes Joel Spolsky of Joel on Software [3].
Vander Wal says, "There is more hype in Web 2.0 than great steps forward."
Amen.
[1] http://www.vanderwal.net/essays/pic/050715/
[2] http://ricksegal.typepad.com/pmv/2005/10/web_20_a_che
No matter how nicely dressed and groomed a person is, if the person has motives that are not apparent in the first meeting, people become wary of such a person.I've experienced it recently at a large tradeshow. A woman came up to me, smiling. I thought she wanted to know about what the experts at the booth and I had to offer. So I told her about our offerings. She then only said one thing: may I have your business card? I gave it to her.Right then my internal alarm bell rang.I've attended many tradeshows in t
All of these are indicators of the big steps forward we're seeing on the Web. They should not be grouped and labeled.
I still don't get it. What is 2.0?
Forget Web 2.0, but not what it represents.
It represents the change in how people and information interact on the Web. It represents designers and developers are thinking about how people use information and that users add value. It represents different approaches for making this happen.
To be honest, writing this article has been difficult. Read the many definitions of Web 2.0 on the Web and no two say the same thing. It's yet another buzzword. As Rick Segal writes in his post on the topic, "Don't look for the buzz words to get you into the game or get you a check."
The term isn't important. It's about seeing a change in the Web as users enjoy more real-time control and participation while connecting to each other through many means. So to heck with the "label" and just know the Web is growing up and a lot of things are happening in terms of the advances made to make it a more interactive experience that puts the user in the driver's seat.
"The term Web 2.0 particularly bugs me. It's not a real concept. It has no meaning. It's a big, vague, nebulous cloud of pure architectural nothingness," writes Joel Spolsky of Joel on Software [3].
Vander Wal says, "There is more hype in Web 2.0 than great steps forward."
Amen.
[1] http://www.vanderwal.net/essays/pic/050715/
[2] http://ricksegal.typepad.com/pmv/2005/10/web_20_a_che
Entrepreneurs are a special breed of high achievers. They create things, get things started: businesses, clubs, churches, associations, even nations. Their motivations vary. Not all want to be rich. Not all want to produce a Fortune 500 company. Some are motivated by pleasure or civic pride or the desire for fame. Mary Madden, president of Information America, told me she and Burton Goldstein started their company because it gave them freedom and flexibility.Entrepreneurs see a world that is incomplete. It probably does no
The term isn't important. It's about seeing a change in the Web as users enjoy more real-time control and participation while connecting to each other through many means. So to heck with the "label" and just know the Web is growing up and a lot of things are happening in terms of the advances made to make it a more interactive experience that puts the user in the driver's seat.
"The term Web 2.0 particularly bugs me. It's not a real concept. It has no meaning. It's a big, vague, nebulous cloud of pure architectural nothingness," writes Joel Spolsky of Joel on Software [3].
Vander Wal says, "There is more hype in Web 2.0 than great steps forward."
Amen.
[1] http://www.vanderwal.net/essays/pic/050715/
[2] http://ricksegal.typepad.com/pmv/2005/10/web_20_a_check.html
[3] http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2005/10/21.html
HTTP = HTML link (for blogs, profiles,phorums):
<a href="http://www.added4u.com/article/50791/added4u-Web-20-Is-It-Just-Hype.html">Web 2.0: Is It Just Hype?</a>
BB link (for phorums):
[url=http://www.added4u.com/article/50791/added4u-Web-20-Is-It-Just-Hype.html]Web 2.0: Is It Just Hype?[/url]
Related Articles:
Bar Code Label Uses for Your Business
The Buying Process - Understanding the Steps Every Customer Takes on the Path to a Deal
Bookmark it:
|