Basics
Briefly, the term Web 2.0 is a phrase that describes what would otherwise be very hard to communicate in a word or two. Web 2.0 was first coined at a conference for that reason – to share a language concerning a complicated idea. Here’s a snippet from O’Reilly’s view and pioneering understanding, “What’s more, the companies that had survived the collapse seemed to have some things in common. Could it be that the dot-com collapse marked some kind of turning point for the web, such that a call to action such as “Web 2.0″ might make sense? We agreed that it did, and so the Web 2.0 Conference was born.”
Problem
“But what was it that made us identify one application or approach as ‘Web 1.0′ and another as ‘Web 2.0′? (The question is particularly urgent because the Web 2.0 meme has become so widespread that companies are now pasting it on as a marketing buzzword, with no real understanding of just what it means. The question is particularly difficult because many of those buzzword-addicted startups are definitely not Web 2.0″ according to O’Reilly.
The real problem now is people don’t understand that Web 2.0 is a result of the dot com bubble burst and consequent shakeout. Only some were left standing and surprisingly they had a lot in common. With technology advances there will be shakeouts, that’s why I don’t believe it’s a bubble.
What will pop
Bubbles that will burst are web properties that don’t offer a real value to there users.
What will not
Web 2.0 has more attributes that I believe can never burst: Harnessing Collective Intelligence, Data Flexibility, and Rich User Experience to name a few.
What I like about Web 2.0 and my Point
With social computing came the inherent need for user centered design. So a part of Web 2.0 is a rich user experience. How can that pop? It can’t.