Jump to content

Web 2.0: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
←Replaced content with 'thumb|A [[tag cloud presenting Web 2.0 themes]]'
Line 1: Line 1:
[[Image:Web 2.0 Map.svg|thumb|A [[tag cloud]] presenting Web 2.0 [[theme]]s]]
[[Image:Web 2.0 Map.svg|thumb|A [[tag cloud]] presenting Web 2.0 [[theme]]s]]

The term "'''Web 2.0'''" describes the changing trends in the use of [[World Wide Web]] technology and [[web design]] that aim to enhance [[creativity]], communications, secure information sharing, collaboration and functionality of the web. Web 2.0 concepts have led to the development and evolution of web culture communities and [[Web service|hosted services]], such as [[social networking sites|social-networking sites]], [[video sharing|video sharing sites]], [[wiki]]s, [[blog]]s, and [[Folksonomy|folksonomies]]. The term became notable after the first [[O'Reilly Media]] Web 2.0 conference in 2004.<ref name="graham">{{cite web | url=http://www.paulgraham.com/web20.html | title=Web 2.0 | author=[[Paul Graham]] | month=November | year=2005 | accessdate=2006-08-02 | quote="I first heard the phrase 'Web 2.0' in the name of the Web 2.0 conference in 2004."
}}</ref><ref name="oreilly">{{
cite web
|url=http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/what-is-web-20.html
|title=What Is Web 2.0
|publisher=O'Reilly Network
|author=[[Tim O'Reilly]]
|date=[[2005-09-30]]
|accessdate=2006-08-06
}}</ref>
Although the term suggests a new version of the [[World Wide Web]], it does not refer to an update to any technical specifications, but rather to changes in the ways [[software developer]]s and [[computer science)| end-users]] utilize the Web. According to [[Tim O'Reilly]]:

{{Cquote|Web 2.0 is the [[business]] [[revolution]] in the [[computer industry]] caused by the move to the [[Internet]] as a [[Platform (computing)| platform]], and an attempt to understand the rules for success on that new platform.<ref>{{cite web | url=http://radar.oreilly.com/archives/2006/12/web_20_compact.html | title=Web 2.0 Compact Definition: Trying Again |author=Tim O'Reilly | date=[[2006-12-10]] |accessdate=2007-01-20 }}</ref>}}

[[Tim Berners-Lee]], inventor of the World Wide Web, has questioned whether one can use the term in any meaningful way, since many of the technology components of Web 2.0 have existed since the early days of the Web.<ref name="developerWorks Interviews: Tim Berners-Lee">
{{cite web |url=http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/podcast/dwi/cm-int082206txt.html |title=developerWorks Interviews: Tim Berners-Lee
|date=2006-07-28 |accessdate=2007-02-07 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060901-7650.html |title=Tim Berners-Lee on Web 2.0: "nobody even knows what it means" |author=Nate Anderson |date=2006-09-01 |accessdate=2006-09-05 |publisher=arstechnica.com }}</ref>

== Definition ==

Web 2.0 encapsulates the idea of the proliferation of interconnectivity and interactivity of web-delivered content. [[Tim O'Reilly]] regards Web 2.0 as the way that [[business]] embraces the strengths of the web and uses it as a platform. O'Reilly considers that [[Eric E. Schmidt|Eric Schmidt]]'s abridged slogan, ''don't fight the Internet'', encompasses the essence of Web 2.0 — building applications and [[Web service|services]] around the unique features of the [[Internet]], as opposed to expecting the Internet to suit as a platform (effectively "fighting the Internet").

In the opening talk of the [[Web 2.0 Conference (2004)|first Web 2.0 conference]], O'Reilly and [[John Battelle]] summarized what they saw as the themes of Web 2.0. They argued that the web had become a [[platform (software)|platform]], with software above the level of a single device, leveraging the power of the [[The Long Tail| "Long Tail"]], and with data as a driving force. According to O'Reilly and Battelle, an [[Software architecture| architecture]] of participation where users can contribute website content creates [[network effect]]s. Web 2.0 technologies tend to foster [[innovation]] in the assembly of systems and [[website| site]]s composed by pulling together features from distributed, independent developers. (This could be seen as a kind of "open source" or possible "Agile" development process, consistent with an end to the traditional software adoption cycle, typified by the so-called "[[perpetual beta]]".)

Web 2.0 technology encourages [[Lightweight (disambiguation)| lightweight]] [[business model]]s enabled by [[Web syndication|syndication]] of content and of service and by ease of picking-up by [[early adopter]]s.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://conferences.oreillynet.com/pub/w/32/presentations.html |title=Web 2.0 Conference |publisher=conferences.oreillynet.com
|accessdate=2007-11-08 }}</ref>

O'Reilly provided examples of companies or products that embody these principles in his description of his four levels in the hierarchy of Web 2.0 sites:

*Level-3 applications, the most "Web 2.0"-oriented, exist only on the Internet, deriving their effectiveness from the inter-human connections and from the network effects that Web 2.0 makes possible, and growing in effectiveness in proportion as people make more use of them. O'Reilly gave [[eBay]], [[Craigslist]], [[Wikipedia]], [[del.icio.us]], [[Skype]], [[Dodgeball (service)| dodgeball]], and [[AdSense]] as examples.
*Level-2 applications can operate offline but gain advantages from going online. O'Reilly cited [[Flickr]], which benefits from its shared photo-database and from its community-generated tag database.
*Level-1 applications operate offline but gain features online. O'Reilly pointed to Writely (now [[Google Docs & Spreadsheets]]) and [[iTunes]] (because of its music-store portion).
*Level-0 applications work as well offline as online. O'Reilly gave the examples of [[MapQuest]], [[List of Yahoo!-owned sites and services| Yahoo! Local]], and [[Google Maps]] (mapping-applications using contributions from users to advantage could rank as "level 2").

Non-web applications like [[email]], [[Comparison of instant messaging clients| instant-messaging client]]s, and the [[telephone]] fall outside the above hierarchy.<ref>{{cite web |title=Levels of the Game: The Hierarchy of Web 1.5 Applications |work=O'Reilly radar |url=http://radar.oreilly.com/archives/2006/07/levels_of_the_game.html |author=[[Tim O'Reilly]] |date=[[2006-07-17]] |accessdate=2006-08-08
}}</ref>

== Characteristics ==
[[Image:Flickr-screenshot.jpg|thumb|right|[[Flickr]], A Web 2.0 web site that allows users to upload and share photos]]
Web 2.0 websites allow users to do more than just retrieve information. They can build on the interactive facilities of "[[Web 1.0]]" to provide [[Web operating system|"Network as platform"]] computing, allowing users to run software-applications entirely through a browser.<ref name="oreilly"/> Users can own the data on a Web 2.0 site and exercise control over that data.<ref name="hinchcliffe">{{
cite web
|url=http://web2.wsj2.com/the_state_of_web_20.htm
|title=The State of Web 2.0
|publisher=Web Services Journal
|author=Dion Hinchcliffe
|date=[[2006-04-02]]
|accessdate=2006-08-06
}}</ref><ref name="oreilly" /> These sites may have an "Architecture of participation" that encourages users to add value to the application as they use it.<ref name="oreilly" /><ref name="graham" />
This stands in contrast to very old traditional websites, the sort which limited visitors to viewing and whose content only the site's owner could modify. Web 2.0 sites often feature a rich, user-friendly interface based on [[Ajax (programming)|Ajax]],<ref name="oreilly" /><ref name="graham" /> [[OpenLaszlo]], [[Adobe Flex|Flex]] or similar rich media..<ref name="hinchcliffe" /><ref name="oreilly" />

The concept of Web-as-[[Participatory culture|participation]]-platform captures many of these characteristics. [[Bart Decrem]], a founder and former CEO of [[Flock (web browser)|Flock]], calls Web 2.0 the "participatory Web"<ref name="decrem">{{
cite web
|url=http://www.flock.com/node/4500
|title=Introducing Flock Beta 1
|publisher=[[Flock (web browser)|Flock]] official [[blog]]
|author=Bart Decrem
|date=2006-06-13
|accessdate=2007-01-13}}</ref> and regards the Web-as-information-source as Web 1.0.
The impossibility of excluding group-members who don’t contribute to the provision of goods from sharing profits gives rise to the possibility that rational members will prefer to withhold their contribution of effort and [[free rider problem|free-ride]] on the contribution of others.<ref>
Gerald Marwell and Ruth E. Ames: "Experiments on the Provision of Public Goods. I. Resources, Interest, Group Size, and the Free-Rider Problem". ''The American Journal of Sociology'', Vol. 84, No. 6 (May, 1979), pp. 1335-1360
</ref>

According to Best,<ref>Best, D., 2006. Web 2.0 Next Big Thing or Next Big Internet Bubble? Lecture Web Information Systems. Techni sche Universiteit Eindhoven.</ref> the characteristics of Web 2.0 are: rich user experience, user participation, dynamic content, [[metadata]], web standards and [[scalability]]. Further characteristics, such as openness, freedom<ref>
{{cite web
|url=http://www.informationweek.com/news/management/showArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=EWRPGLVJ53OW2QSNDLPCKHSCJUNN2JVN?articleID=199702353&_requestid=494050
|title=Amid The Rush To Web 2.0, Some Words Of Warning -- Web 2.0 -- InformationWeek
|publisher=www.informationweek.com
|accessdate=2008-04-04
|last=Greenmeier, Larry and Gaudin, Sharon
|first=
}}
</ref> and collective intelligence<ref>O’Reilly, T., 2005. What is Web 2.0. Design Patterns and Business Models for the Next Generation of Software, 30, p.2005.</ref> by way of user participation, can also be viewed as essential attributes of Web 2.0.

== Technology overview ==
The sometimes complex and continually evolving technology infrastructure of Web 2.0 includes [[computer server|server]]-software, [[content syndication| content-syndication]], [[List of network protocols| messaging-protocol]]s, standards-oriented [[web browser| browser]]s with [[plugin]]s and [[extension]]s, and various client-applications. The differing, yet complementary approaches of such elements provide Web 2.0 sites with [[Computer data storage| information-storage]], creation, and dissemination challenges and capabilities that go beyond what the public formerly expected in the environment of the so-called "Web 1.0".

Web 2.0 websites typically include some of the following features/techniques that Andrew McAfee used the acronym SLATES to refer to them: <ref> McAfee, A. (2006). Enterprise 2.0: The Dawn of Emergent Collaboration. MIT Sloan Management review. Vol. 47, No. 3, p. 21-28.</ref>

1. “Search: the ease of finding information through keyword search which makes the platform valuable.<br />
2. Links: guides to important pieces of information. The best pages are the most frequently linked to.<br />
3. Authoring: the ability to create constantly updating content over a platform that is shifted from being the creation of a few to being the constantly updated, interlinked work. In wikis, the content is iterative in the sense that the people undo and redo each other’s work. While in blogs is cumulative that posts and comments of individuals are accumulated over time. <br />
4. Tags: categorization of content by creating tags that are simple, one-word descriptions to facilitate searching and avoid rigid, pre-made categories.<br />
5. Extensions: automation some of the work and pattern matching by using algorithms e.g. amazon.com recommendations. <br />
6. Signals: the use of RSS (Really Simple Syndication) technology to notify users with any changes of the content by sending e-mails to them.”

==Usage==
=== Higher Education ===

Universities are using Web 2.0 in order to reach out and engage with [[generation Y]] and other prospective students according to recent reports.<ref>http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,,24208226-12332,00.html</ref> Examples of this are: social networking websites – [[YouTube]], [[MySpace]], [[Facebook]], [[Youmeo]], [[Twitter]] and [[Flickr]]; upgrading institutions’ websites in gen Y-friendly ways – stand-alone micro-websites with minimal navigation; placing current students in cyberspace{{huh}} or student blogs; and blogging systems such as [[Moodle]] enable prospective students to log on and ask questions.{{huh}}

In addition to free social networking websites, schools have contracted with companies that provide many of the same services as MySpace and Facebook, but can integrate with their existing database. Companies such as Harris Connect, iModules and Publishing Concepts have developed alumni online community software packages that provide schools with a way to communicate to their alumni and allow alumni to communicate with each other in a safe, secure environment.

== Web-based applications and desktops ==
[[Ajax (programming)|Ajax]] has prompted the development of websites that mimic desktop applications, such as [[word processor|word processing]], the [[spreadsheet]], and [[presentation program|slide-show presentation]]. [[WYSIWYG]] [[wiki]] sites replicate many features of PC authoring applications. Still other sites perform collaboration and [[project management]] functions. In 2006 [[Google|Google, Inc.]] acquired one of the best-known sites of this broad class, [[Google Docs & Spreadsheets|Writely]].<ref>
{{cite web
|url=http://www.news.com/2100-1032_3-6048136.html
|title=Google buys Web word-processing technology | CNET News.com
|publisher=www.news.com
|accessdate=2007-12-12
|last=
|first=
}}
</ref>

Several browser-based "[[operating system]]s" have emerged, including [[EyeOS]]<ref>
{{cite web
|url=http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/11/27/eyeos-open-source-webos-for-the-masses/
|title=Can eyeOS Succeed Where Desktop.com Failed?
|publisher=www.techcrunch.com
|accessdate=2007-12-12
|last=
|first=
}}
</ref> and [[YouOS]].<ref>
{{cite web
|url=http://www.businessweek.com/the_thread/techbeat/archives/2006/03/hey_youos.html
|title=Tech Beat Hey YouOS! - BusinessWeek
|publisher=www.businessweek.com
|accessdate=2007-12-12
|last=
|first=
}}
</ref> Although coined as such, many of these services function less like a traditional operating system and more as an application platform. They mimic the user experience of desktop operating-systems, offering features and applications similar to a PC environment, as well as the added ability of being able to run within any modern browser.

Numerous web-based application services appeared during the [[dot-com bubble]] of 1997–2001 and then vanished, having failed to gain a critical mass of customers. In 2005, [[WebEx]] acquired one of the better-known of these, [[Intranets.com]], for USD45 million.<ref>
{{cite web
|url=http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,122068-page,1/article.html
|title=PC World - WebEx Snaps Up Intranets.com
|publisher=www.pcworld.com
|accessdate=2007-12-12
|last=
|first=
}}
</ref>

Another example of a web-based service that didn't survive the [[dot-com bubble]] burst was Pets.com. Pets.com business model was flawed in that the products they were selling and delivering to customers' doorsteps had very thin margins and were expensive to ship.<ref>
{{cite web
|url=http://www.thestandard.com/news/2008/05/29/where-are-they-now-pets-com
|title=The Industry Standard - Where are they now: Pets.com
|publisher=www.thstandard.com
|accessdate=2008-11-04
|last=
|first=
}}
</ref>

=== Internet applications ===
{{main|Rich Internet application}}
{{Unreferencedsection|date=November 2007}}

[[rich Internet application|Rich-Internet application]] techniques such as [[AJAX (programming)|AJAX]], [[Adobe Flash]], [[Adobe Flex|Flex]], [[Java applet|Java]], [[Silverlight]] and [[Curl (programming language)|Curl]] have evolved that have the potential to improve the [[user experience|user-experience]] in browser-based applications. The technologies allow a web-page to request an update for some part of its content, and to alter that part in the browser, without needing to refresh the whole page at the same time.

;Server-side software
Functionally, Web 2.0 applications build on the existing [[Web server]] architecture, but rely much more heavily on [[back end|back-end]] software. Syndication differs only nominally from the methods of publishing using [[dynamic content management]], but web services typically require much more robust [[database]] and [[workflow]] support, and become very similar to the traditional [[intranet]] functionality of an [[application server]].

;Client-side software
The extra functionality provided by Web 2.0 depends on the ability of users to work with the data stored on [[web server|server]]s. This can come about through [[form (web)|form]]s in an [[HTML]] page, through a scripting-language such as [[Javascript]] / [[Ajax (programming)| Ajax]], or through [[Adobe Flash|Flash]], [[Curl (programming language)|Curl Applets]] or [[Java applet| Java Applets]]. These methods all make use of the [[client (computing)|client]] computer to reduce server workloads and to increase the responsiveness of the application.

=== XML and RSS ===

Advocates of "Web 2.0" may regard syndication of site content as a Web 2.0 feature, involving as it does standardized protocols, which permit end-users to make use of a site's data in another context (such as another website, a browser plugin, or a separate desktop application). Protocols which permit syndication include [[RSS (file format)|RSS]] (Really Simple Syndication — also known as "web syndication"), [[Resource Description Framework|RDF]] (as in RSS 1.1), and [[Atom (standard)|Atom]], all of them [[XML]]-based formats. Observers have started to refer to these technologies as "[[Web feed]]" as the usability of Web 2.0 evolves and the more user-friendly Feeds icon supplants the RSS icon.

;Specialized protocols
Specialized protocols such as [[FOAF (software)|FOAF]] and [[XHTML Friends Network|XFN]] (both for [[social networking]]) extend the functionality of sites or permit end-users to interact without centralized websites.

=== Web APIs ===
Machine-based interaction, a common feature of Web 2.0 sites, uses two main approaches to Web APIs, which allow web-based access to data and functions: [[Representational State Transfer|REST]] and [[SOAP]].

# REST (Representational State Transfer) Web APIs use [[HTTP]] alone to interact, with [[XML]] (eXtensible Markup Language) or [[JSON]] payloads;
# SOAP involves [[HTTP#Request Methods|POSTing]] more elaborate XML messages and requests to a server that may contain quite complex, but pre-defined, instructions for the server to follow.

Often servers use proprietary APIs, but standard APIs (for example, for posting to a blog or notifying a blog update) have also come into wide use. Most communications through APIs involve XML or JSON payloads.

See also [[Web Services Description Language]] (WSDL) (the standard way of publishing a SOAP API) and this [[List of Web service specifications|list of Web Service specifications]].

== Economics ==
The analysis of the economic implications of "Web 2.0" applications and loosely-associated technologies such as wikis, blogs, social-networking, open-source, open-content, file-sharing, peer-production, etc. has also gained scientific attention. This area of research investigates the implications Web 2.0 has for an economy and the principles underlying the economy of Web 2.0.

Cass Sunstein's book "Infotopia" discussed the Hayekian nature of collaborative production, characterized by decentralized decision-making, directed by (often non-monetary) prices rather than central planners in business or government.

[[Don Tapscott]] and Anthony D. Williams argue in their book ''[[Wikinomics|Wikinomics: How Mass Collaboration Changes Everything]]'' (2006) that the economy of "the new web" depends on mass collaboration. Tapscott and Williams regard it as important for new media companies to find ways of how to make profit with the help of Web 2.0.{{Fact|date=November 2007}} The prospective Internet-based economy that they term "Wikinomics" would depend on the principles of openness, peering, sharing, and acting globally. They identify seven Web 2.0 business-models (peer pioneers, ideagoras, [[prosumer]]s, new Alexandrians, platforms for participation, global plantfloor, wiki workplace).{{Fact|date=November 2007}}

Organizations could make use of these principles and models in order to prosper with the help of Web 2.0-like applications: "Companies can design and assemble products with their customers, and in some cases customers can do the majority of the value creation".<ref>
Tapscott, Don and Anthony D. Williams. 2007. ''Wikinomics: How Mass Collaboration Changes Everything''. New York: Penguin. pp. 289sq.
</ref>
"In each instance the traditionally passive buyers of editorial and advertising take active, participatory roles in value creation."<ref>
Tapscott, Don and Anthony D. Williams. 2007. ''Wikinomics: How Mass Collaboration Changes Everything''. New York: Penguin. p. 14.
</ref>
Tapscott and Williams suggest business strategies as "models where masses of consumers, employees, suppliers, business partners, and even competitors cocreate value in the absence of direct managerial control".<ref>
Tapscott, Don and Anthony D. Williams. 2007. ''Wikinomics: How Mass Collaboration Changes Everything''. New York: Penguin. p. 55.
</ref> Tapscott and Williams see the outcome as an economic democracy.

Some other views in the scientific debate agree with Tapscott and Williams that value-creation increasingly depends on harnessing open source/content, networking, sharing, and peering, but disagree that this will result in an economic democracy, predicting a subtle form and deepening of exploitation, in which Internet-based global outsourcing reduces labor-costs by transferring jobs from workers in wealthy nations to workers in poor nations. In such a view, the economic implications of a new web might include on the one hand the emergence of new business-models based on global outsourcing, whereas on the other hand non-commercial online platforms could undermine profit-making and anticipate a co-operative economy. For example, Tiziana Terranova speaks of "free labor" (performed without payment) in the case where prosumers produce surplus value in the circulation-sphere of the cultural industries.<ref> Terranova, Tiziana. 2000. "Free Labor: Producing Culture for the Digital Economy". ''Social Text'' 18(2): 33-57. </ref>

Some examples of Web 2.0 business models that attempt to generate revenues in online shopping and online marketplaces are referred to as [[social commerce]] and [[social shopping]]. [[Social commerce]] involves user-generated marketplaces where individuals can set up online shops and link their shops in a networked marketplace, drawing on concepts of [[electronic commerce]] and [[social networking]]. [[Social shopping]] involves customers interacting with each other while shopping, typically online, and often in a social network environment. Academic research on the economic value implications of social commerce and having sellers in online marketplaces link to each others' shops has been conducted by researchers in the business school at Columbia University.<ref>[http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1150995 "Deriving Value from Social Commerce Networks." Stephen, A.T. and Toubia, O. Columbia University.]</ref>

== Criticism ==
The argument exists that "Web 2.0" does not represent a new version of the [[World Wide Web]] at all, but merely continues to use so-called "Web 1.0" technologies and concepts. Techniques such as [[AJAX (programming)|AJAX]] do not replace underlying protocols like [[HTTP]], but add an additional layer of abstraction on top of them. Many of the ideas of Web 2.0 had already been featured in implementations on networked systems well before the term "Web 2.0" emerged. [[Amazon.com]], for instance, has allowed users to write reviews and consumer guides since its launch in 1995, in a form of self-publishing. Amazon also opened its API to outside developers in 2002.<ref>{{
cite web
|title=Amazon Web Services API
|work=O'Reilly Network
|url=http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/wlg/1707?wlg=yes
|author=[[Tim O'Reilly]]
|date=2002-06-18
|accessdate=2006-05-27
}}</ref> Previous developments also came from research in [[Computer Supported Collaborative Learning|computer-supported collaborative learning]] and [[CSCW|computer-supported cooperative work]] and from established products like [[Lotus Notes]] and [[Lotus Domino]].

In a podcast interview [[Tim Berners-Lee]] described the term "Web 2.0" as a "piece of jargon." "Nobody really knows what it means," he said, and went on to say that "if Web 2.0 for you is blogs and wikis, then that is people to people. But that was what the Web was supposed to be all along."<ref name="developerWorks Interviews: Tim Berners-Lee"/>

Other criticism has included the term “a second bubble” (referring to the [[Dot-com bubble]] of circa 1995–2001), suggesting that too many Web 2.0 companies attempt to develop the same product with a lack of business models. ''[[The Economist]]'' has written of "Bubble 2.0."<ref>{{cite web |title=Bubble 2.0 |work=The Economist |url=http://www.economist.com/business/displaystory.cfm?story_id=E1_QQNVDDS |date=2005-12-22 |accessdate=2006-12-20 }}</ref> [[Venture capital]]ist [[Josh Kopelman]] noted that Web 2.0 had excited only 530,651 people (the number of subscribers at that time to [[TechCrunch]], a Weblog covering Web 2.0 matters), too few users to make them an economically viable target for consumer applications.<ref>{{cite web |title=53,651 |author=[[Josh Kopelman]] |work=Redeye VC |url=http://redeye.firstround.com/2006/05/53651.html |date=2006-05-11 |accessdate=2006-12-21 }}</ref> Although [[Bruce Sterling]] reports he's a fan of Web 2.0, he thinks it is now dead as a rallying concept.<ref>{{cite web |title= "Bruce Sterling presenta il web 2.0" |work="LASTAMPA.it" |url=http://www.lastampa.it/multimedia/multimedia.asp?p=1&IDmsezione=29&IDalbum=8558&tipo=VIDEO#mpos}}</ref>

Critics have cited the language used to describe the hype cycle of Web 2.0<ref>{{cite web |title= "Gartner 2006 Emerging Technologies Hype Cycle |url=http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=495475}} </ref> as an example of [[Techno-utopianism|Techno-utopianist]] rhetoric.<ref>{{cite web |title="Critical Perspectives on Web 2.0," Special issue of ''[[First Monday (journal)|First Monday]]'', 13(3), 2008. |url=http://www.uic.edu/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/issue/view/263/showToc }}</ref> Web 2.0 is not the first example of communication creating a false, hyper-inflated sense of the value of technology and its impact on culture. The dot com boom and subsequent bust in 2000 was a culmination of rhetoric of the technological sublime in terms that would later make their way into Web 2.0 jargon. ''Communication as culture: essays on media and society'' (1989) and the technologies worth as represented in the stock market. Indeed, several years before the dot com stock market crash the then-Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan equated the run up of stock values as irrational exuberance. Shortly before the crash of 2000 a book by Shiller, Robert J. ''Irrational Exuberance. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press'', 2000. was released detailing the overly optimistic euphoria of the dot com industry. The book ''[[Wikinomics|Wikinomics: How Mass Collaboration Changes Everything]]'' (2006) even goes as far as to quote critics of the value of Web 2.0 in an attempt to acknowledge that hyper inflated expectations exist but that Web 2.0 is really different.

== Trademark ==
In November 2004, [[CMP Media]] applied to the [[USPTO]] for a [[service mark]] on the use of the term "WEB 2.0" for live events.<ref>[http://tarr.uspto.gov/servlet/tarr?regser=serial&entry=78322306 USPTO serial number 78322306]</ref> On the basis of this application, CMP Media sent a [[cease and desist|cease-and-desist]] demand to the Irish non-profit organization [[IT@Cork]] on May 24, 2006,<ref>{{cite web |title=O'Reilly and CMP Exercise Trademark on 'Web 2.0' |work=Slashdot |url=http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/05/26/1238245 |date=2006-05-26 |accessdate=2006-05-27 }}</ref> but retracted it two days later.<ref>{{cite web | title=O'Reilly's coverage of Web 2.0 as a service mark | work=O'Reilly Radar | url=http://radar.oreilly.com/archives/2006/05/more_on_our_web_20_service_mar.html | author=Nathan Torkington | date=2006-05-26 | accessdate=2006-06-01 }}</ref> The "WEB 2.0" service mark registration passed final PTO Examining Attorney review on May 10, 2006, but as of June 12, 2006 the PTO had not published the mark for opposition. The [[European Union]] application (application number 004972212, which would confer unambiguous status in Ireland) remains {{As of|2007|alt= currently}} pending after its filing on March 23, 2006.



== See also ==
{{Wikiversity}}

* [[Consumer generated media|Consumer-generated media]]
* [[Mashup (web application hybrid)|Mashups]]
* [[Social media]]
* [[New Media]]
* [[User-generated content]]
* [[Web 1.0]]
* [[Web 3.0]]
* [[Buzzword]]
* [[Business 2.0]]
* [[Enterprise 2.0]]
* [[Social networks]]
* [[Social commerce]]
* [[Social shopping]]
* [[Office suite]]

== References ==
{{reflist|2}}

==External links==
* [http://www.web2summit.com Web 2.0 Summit]
* [http://youtube.com/watch?v=NLlGopyXT_g Web 2.0] - A [[YouTube]] [[video]] made by [[Michael Wesch]] explaining Web 2.0 in just under 5 minutes.
*[[Deloitte & Touche LLP]] - Canada (2008 study) - [http://www.deloitte.com/dtt/article/0,1002,cid=199524,00.html Change your world or the world will change you: The future of collaborative government and Web 2.0]
*[http://www.uic.edu/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/issue/view/263/showToc "Critical Perspectives on Web 2.0"], Special issue of ''[[First Monday (journal)|First Monday]]'', 13(3), 2008.
* MacManus, Richard. Porter, Joshua. [http://www.digital-web.com/articles/web_2_for_designers/ "Web 2.0 for Designers"]. Digital Web Magazine, May 4, 2005.
*[http://infotechone.blogspot.com /Web 2.0 Resource]
* Graham Vickery, Sacha Wunsch-Vincent: [http://www.oecd.org/document/40/0,3343,en_2649_201185_39428648_1_1_1_1,00.html "Participative Web and User-Created Content: Web 2.0, Wikis and Social Networking"]; [[OECD]], 2007

<!-- Please DON'T ADD YOUR BLOG POST here. Wikipedia is not a mere collection of links. -->

[[Category:Branding]]
[[Category:Buzzwords]]
[[Category:Cloud applications]]
[[Category:World Wide Web]]
[[Category:Web services]]
[[Category:Web 2.0| ]]
[[Category:Internet memes]]
[[Category:Social Information Processing]]

[[ar:وب 2.0]]
[[zh-min-nan:Web 2.0]]
[[bg:Web 2.0]]
[[ca:Web 2.0]]
[[cs:Web 2.0]]
[[da:Web 2.0]]
[[de:Web 2.0]]
[[el:Web 2.0]]
[[es:Web 2.0]]
[[eu:Web 2.0]]
[[fa:وب ۲٫۰]]
[[fr:Web 2.0]]
[[gl:Web 2.0]]
[[ko:웹 2.0]]
[[hr:Web 2.0]]
[[id:Web 2.0]]
[[it:Web 2.0]]
[[he:וב 2.0]]
[[ku:Web 2.0]]
[[lt:Web 2.0]]
[[hu:Web 2.0]]
[[mk:Веб 2.0]]
[[nl:Web 2.0]]
[[ja:Web 2.0]]
[[no:Web 2.0]]
[[pl:Web 2.0]]
[[pt:Web 2.0]]
[[ro:Web 2.0]]
[[ru:Веб 2.0]]
[[simple:Web 2.0]]
[[sr:Veb 2.0]]
[[sh:Veb 2.0]]
[[fi:Web 2.0]]
[[sv:Web 2.0]]
[[ta:வலை 2.0]]
[[th:เว็บ 2.0]]
[[vi:Web 2.0]]
[[tg:Web 2.0]]
[[tr:Web 2.0]]
[[uk:Веб 2.0]]
[[yi:וועב 2.0]]
[[zh-yue:Web 2.0]]
[[zh:Web 2.0]]

{{Internet memes}}

Revision as of 08:49, 25 November 2008

A tag cloud presenting Web 2.0 themes
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Web_2.0&oldid=253972712"