What is a "Web 2.0" site? How would I know one if I tripped over it?
These days, we often hear the term "Web 2.0" thrown around in strategy, marketing, implementation and maintenance discussions.
But what do we really mean when we use the loaded term "Web 2.0"? Would we even know a “Web 2.0” site if we tripped across one?
Is it simply a more advanced version of the old internet and its underlying technologies? Is it the emergence of social networking sites? Is it user generated content and collaboration? I think it is all of the above and much, much more.
I am looking for any thoughts folks may have around these and other related topics around Web 2.0, and your choices for "best of breed" Web 2.0 sites you may have come across.
As always, my thanks in advance to all responders.
Rey Khachatourian
Good Answers (11)
Andrew M
Sr. Software Development Engineer at Microsoft
Best Answers in: Web Development (2), Branding (1)
There are a number of things which are rolled up into the "Web 2.0" moniker. Some are stylistic, some are technological, and some are new models of interaction.
Stylistically, "Web 2.0" implies a site which is relatively clean and simple. They tend to prefer the header + 1 centered column design, with very little ornamentation. The background color is almost always white, and bright primary colors call out various features. There tends to be a common use of rounded corners and a flat 2D appearance in most of the graphics on the site. The exception tends to be in the logos which usually have a drop shadow or reflection to them, or use the "Aqua" look typical of Mac OS X.
Technologically, "Web 2.0" refers principally to the use of a combination of technologies called AJAX (Asynchronous JavaScript and XML). This allows small portions of a page to be updated based upon user interaction without requiring a full page refresh. While the technology itself has been around in one form or another for some time now, it's use to avoid full-page refreshes is particularly the hallmark of "Web 2.0".
Finally, the user interaction model of "Web 2.0" is probably the most significant and most noticeable. The model of "Web 1.0" is that some person or company creates a website for the viewing of others. The website owner creates all the content, and the website viewer takes it in. In "Web 2.0", the website itself is interactive, and the viewers are invited to create a large portion of the content. A typical blog will now include the article itself, and then a long section for users to post comments back and forth to one another. A wiki allows for portions or the entire site to be updated or completely rewritten by users. A social network contains content posted within certain templates or guidelines provides by the website owner. This is the the most significant aspect of "Web 2.0"... that the most interesting content is contributed by the individual users.
Rajesh V
Senior Technical Lead at HCL Technologies
Best Answers in: Career Management (1), Enterprise Software (1), Computers and Software (1), Databases (1), Software Development (1), Web Development (1)
Hi Rey,
Any site that provides you information gathered from other users and lets you share information, acts intelligently based on the information it has gathered from the users and lets the users of the site provide it with the intelligence rather than trying to be intelligent by itself is a Web 2.0 site.
Intelligence though not a primary requirement:), happens to be a side effect in most cases where people have just consolidated ideas based on the data available.
The concept of collective intelligence like the Borgs but applied to the internet where people provide and build information by networking, gave birth to web 2.0.
Some of the glaring sites like http://wikipedia.org, piacasa.com, flickr.com, youtube.com, digg.com, del.icio.us, most of the blog sites, mashups like http://wikimapia.org, are all web 2.0.
There delivery medium of knowledge is not restricted to the browser. For e.g we have mobile oriented sites like twitter.
Basically the Web 2.0 factor boils down to the newer set of capabilities that are arriving based on 3 primary phrases, "collective intelligence", "sharing anything" and "available anywhere."
Regards
Rajesh V
Web 2.0 was coined by someone at O'Reilly books AFAIK. The term is meaningless, Much of the so called web 2.0 technology was available prior to the term being coined.
Back in the old days we termed this Interactivity. Any site that creates dialogue and interaction between its users and site owners could be considered web 2.0.
Blogs are the most obvious sign that a website is considered web 2.0 compliant. Funny though that Blogs have been used since the late 90's, In fact I was advised of a blog that was around in '94.
Web 2.0 is a mind set, not a technology, The term was coined to differentiate between static brochureware websites and those that were interactive.
Links:
Sachendra Y
Interaction Designer / Product Manager / Mobilist / Social Media Enthusiast
Best Answers in: Blogging (2), Product Design (1), Wireless (1)
The primary difference between Web 2.0 and other internet applications is the amount of interaction in the interface.
A web 2.0 App provides a wider range of controls to improve users’ interaction with the interface, allowing efficient interactions, better error management, feedback and overall user experience.
The key features of these applications include:
* The user interacts directly with page elements (inline editing, drag-and-drop, panning a map)
* Part of a page is updated (instead of reloading)
* More detailed information is available on the same page (instead of on a new page)
* Feedback, confirmation and error messages are provided within the page
Some of my favorite Web 2.0 sites
Gmail
Google Maps
LinkedIn
Flickr
YouTube
Facebook
I've given links to couple of articles below exploring the potential of Web 2.0 (by Jared M. Spool) and how Web 2.0 can go wrong (by Jacob Nielson)
Links:
Peter "
President at User Effect / Usability Specialist
Best Answers in: Blogging (3), Web Development (3), E-Commerce (2), Search Marketing (1), Business Plans (1), Computers and Software (1)
As Guy said, "Web 2.0" is a label that got applied after the fact, but while it's certainly over-hyped, I don't think it's meaningless. It's a recognition that, during it's first full decade in common use, the web changed in some pretty fundamental ways.
The original O'Reilly paper is long and mostly a showcase of examples, but their "definition" of Web 2.0 basically boils down to three changes: (1) the rise of dynamic content, (2) the advent of the user-driven web, and (3) the evolution of distribution (Google, RSS, etc.).
I recently wrote a Web 2.0 "cheat sheet" you might find useful; I'll include a link below.
Links:
(Curtis) R. C
Chief Rainmaker, SharksFly Marketing Solutions & RankSense SEO Software
Hi Rey,
Here is an excellent source of information on both Web 2.0 and SEO related stuff (having a Web 2.0 site helps with the latter).
http://www.seomoz.org/web2.0
O'Reilly's has a good overview:
http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/what-is-web-20.html
Finally here is a checklist I sent to my web design team:
Web 2.0 Key Points
1. Simple, scalable, bright and usable/sharable
2. Simplicity - free of noise, quality content & more selective images & larger font
3. Central content - with a gradient and contrasting background or diagonal line pattern
4. Horizontal navigation – simple and easy to use, larger & very clear
5. Large fonts – use large & clear fonts
6. Images – reflection or 3D – same for logo if possible
7. Rounded corners – vs sharp corners
8. Ajax features make the site more usable, fast and attractive (like the Ajax load generator where necessary)
9. Syndication – if possible use RSS to syndicate content
10. Bookmarking - ie. Use digg, delicious and reddit icons
11. Bright colors where possible (i.e. technorati darker blue, RSS Button orange, technorati red, etc.)
12. Introduce Your Service - it's a good idea to put an introductory text about your service in the home page, put it in large text, bullets and support it with images and icons
Cheers,
Curtis
(Curtis) R. C also suggests this expert on this topic:
Ingrid C
Chief Word Wizard, Heart Harmony
Best Answers in: Personnel Policies (1), Business Development (1)
I see Web 2.0 as a cultural vs a technological phenomena.
* People are changing how they wish to interact with each other and with society. They wish to interact in depth with peers of similar interests ... being able to dig deeper into a subject at whim.
* They ignore blatant sales pushes from people they don't know or trust. Old websites with traditional squeeze pages then long copy pages to bring in the money are not as effective with Web 2.0 preferred users - they just click away in droves.
* People wish to stay connected with people whose opinions they value.
* People wish to share their knowledge and expertise with others - with an increased openness to sharing vs siloing information. Knowledge is still power - but only if it is shared.
Technology has moved to reflect the cultural changes - we have seen the rise of Facebook, Twitter, Squidoo and all of the Wiki derivations. Basically all have the same intent - to facilitate interaction, communication and bonding between people willing to share.
regards
Ingrid
Eileen B
IT Professional, Information Security Quality Assurance Operations & Administration / President, CMU SEI LI SPIN
Best Answers in: Using LinkedIn (53), Staffing and Recruiting (12), Career Management (12), Computers and Software (8), Quality Management and Standards (7), Software Development (7), Web Development (7), Ethics (6), Change Management (5), Professional Networking (5), Enterprise Software (5), Freelancing and Contracting (4), Job Search (4), Accounting (4), Government Policy (4), Internet Marketing (4), Organizational Development (4), Project Management (4), Education and Schools (3), Business Development (3), Supply Chain Management (3), Blogging (3), E-Commerce (3), Databases (3), Travel Tools (2), Certification and Licenses (2), Personnel Policies (2), Internationalization and Localization (2), Contracts (2), Employment and Labor Law (2), Advertising (2), Public Relations (2), Business Analytics (2), Corporate Governance (2), Inventory Management (2), Manufacturing (2), Personal Taxes (2), Professional Organizations (2), Biotech (2), Computer Networking (2), Commercial Real Estate (1), Customer Service (1), Facilities Management (1), Regulation and Compliance (1), Conference Venues (1), Corporate Taxes (1), Economics (1), Government Contracts (1), Government Services (1), International Law (1), Treaties, Agreements and Organizations (1), Criminal Law (1), Antitrust Law (1), Intellectual Property (1), Direct Marketing (1), Guerrilla Marketing (1), Labor Relations (1), Planning (1), Bond Markets (1), Hedge Funds (1), Market Research and Definition (1), Starting Up (1), Information Security (1), Information Storage (1), Telecommunications (1)
Hi Reynold,
Great question! I think I will stick with one of my virtual mentors, Tim O'Reilly, when he said: "Users add value." Above and beyond being passive viewers, they are active participants in a *platform* - blogging not just a personal website that is static.
Christopher Alexander also has an interesting book with an equally interesting perspective that is quite accurate entitled: " A Pattern Language" (linked below) in where he states:
"Cooperate, Don't Control. Web 2.0 applications are built of a network of cooperating data services. Therefore: Offer web services interfaces and content syndication, and re-use the data services of others. Support lightweight programming models that allow for loosely-coupled systems."
Hope that helps :)
Eileen
Links:
Ravindran G
Senior Application Development Consultant, Premier Developer Advisory Services at Microsoft Corporation
Welcome to a new experience. Stepping into web 2.0 is akin to falling in Love, it can be described but can only be experienced by you!
The following are the biochemical changes you will go through as you step into one such site -
1. Community interaction - You would see users having a big say on what is good and what is bad. This effect can come into its own when you see users dictating what should go into the site.
2. Usability: You find the site easy to use. As simple as that. You no more click forever to see the results you want to. The site is intuitive and responsive.
3. You matter: You find yourself being heard. You have the ability to dictate and change the site world. You are heard.
4. Accessible: You get to access the site through your RSS reader, cell phone and email. You are potentially connected to the site all the time.
Even if you detect 3 out of these 4 broad features, deem it to be 2.0.
PS: Wait for 3.0. When you step into it one such site for the first time, your door bell will ring with your favorite Pizza and drink delivered!
Wallace J
Multimedia Producer, Mind Taffy Design; Graphics Design, VR and i3D programming for Acrobat 3D PDF
Best Answers in: Web Development (7), Using LinkedIn (5), Events Marketing (4), Graphic Design (3), Advertising (2), Computers and Software (2), Education and Schools (1), Mentoring (1), Conference Venues (1), Financial Regulation (1), Staffing and Recruiting (1), Internationalization and Localization (1), Direct Marketing (1), Guerrilla Marketing (1), Internet Marketing (1), Viral Marketing (1), Business Development (1), Public Relations (1), Sales Techniques (1), Change Management (1), Project Management (1), Personal Debt Management (1), Branding (1), Market Research and Definition (1), Small Business (1), E-Commerce (1), Wireless (1)
1. Social Interaction is Present. Users Post, Comment, Blog &/or Network.
2. Webpages are generated in real-time. The Content Constantly Changes.
3. Changes in Content are Based on what Website Community is Doing.
4. Server-Side technologies, such as AJAX, Ruby, PHP and SQL are used.
5. A good example of this is the site that this question is posted on. Walls.
MindTaffyLLC@Yahoo.com A Prosperous 2008 to All Linked-Inians... ;) WJ
Links:
Yes, Web 2.0 is more a mindset than a combination of styles and technologies.
In many ways, it's really just delivering what we all thought Web 1.0 -- for you old-timers, who've been online since the mid 90's -- would be, but failed to deliver.
• building online communities
• the consumer is king
• accountability of marketers
Web 1.0 was essentially brochureware -- more show than share. More tell than ask. More inform than engage. But now that the groundwork is finally in place for a real dialog between marketers and consumers, I'm anxious to see what opportunities Web 3.0 will bring.
Links:
More Answers (9)
Matt G
Community builder in Austin, Texas; Hardware verification engineer, software consultant.
Best Answers in: Using LinkedIn (8), Professional Networking (2), Mergers and Acquisitions (1), Government Policy (1), Staffing and Recruiting (1), Viral Marketing (1), Business Development (1), Public Relations (1), Planning (1), Engineering (1), Career Management (1), Starting Up (1), Software Development (1), Web Development (1), Wireless (1)
Funny you should ask. You're on one now.
Definitions abound for "Web 2.0". My off-the-cuff definition is that the Web 2.0 site is (a) not static, and (b) full-duplex, meaning that people not only view the site, but interact with it and other site users in meaningful ways, perhaps enough to create a social atmosphere or culture on that site.
Links:
Fred H
Former Marketing and Operations Executive Mattel, McDonald's and Burger King
Best Answers in: Internet Marketing (6), Planning (3), Small Business (3), Software Development (2), Job Search (1), Staffing and Recruiting (1), Internationalization and Localization (1), Advertising (1), Business Development (1), Change Management (1), Organizational Development (1), Branding (1), Market Research and Definition (1), Starting Up (1), Blogging (1), Enterprise Software (1), Using LinkedIn (1)
Rey how are you.
This is an excellent question. I am going to give you my opinion which is somewhat similar to the "experts".
Web 2.0 is not a technology breakthrough. It is a breakthrough in processes that encourage participation, collaboration, and empowerment of site visitors. Answering your first question, how would a web 2.0 be recognized is very subjective. Clearly LinkedIn, MySpace, Facebook (your favorite) SecondLife and YouTube are web 2.0 sites. Plaxco may be on the edge since their is a minor amount of collaboration etc.
I have always steered away from best of breed designation with web 2.0 sites like the ones mentioned. Each one of these sites is somewhat unique in what it allows the participant to do. MySpace wins in graphical presentation. YouTube wins in entertainment experiences. LinkedIn wins for business networking and a source of information. I am not so sure about FaceBook.
The bigger picture is what web 2.0 thinking has unleashed. Proctor and Gamble has moved from creating 100% of its new products from in house efforts to 50%. A huge community has been created world wide to participate in C2B and B2b generated new products. This is just one example. One of the most dramatic examples is OpenOffice.org that created and maintains a suite of MS Office compatible applications supplying them for free.
Interestingly the power of the cell phone is somewhat ignored by others (not me) in web 2.0. It was not long ago that NTT DoCoMo was a modern miricle. Today text and other messages are being exchanged B2B C2C and C2B. The power of the cell phone to access websites allows incredible web 2.0 processes. Every main TV station is encouraging cell phone pictures and videos of news events witnessed or participated in my consumers.
Rey I hope this helps to answer. I know you are on the leading edge of web 2.0. I have no idea what web 3.0 might be.
Robert F
Independent Business Owner(IBO) with Amway/Quixtar
Best Answers in: Using LinkedIn (151), Career Management (7), Customer Service (4), Web Development (4), Staffing and Recruiting (3), Education and Schools (2), Freelancing and Contracting (2), Job Search (2), Internet Marketing (2), Business Development (2), Change Management (2), Organizational Development (2), Planning (2), Engineering (2), Ethics (2), Professional Networking (2), Small Business (2), Blogging (2), Software Development (2), Facilities Management (1), Resume Writing (1), Corporate Debt (1), Treaties, Agreements and Organizations (1), Employment and Labor Law (1), Advertising (1), Graphic Design (1), Customer Relationship Management (1), Sales Techniques (1), Writing and Editing (1), Non-profit Management (1), Manufacturing (1), Retirement and Estate Planning (1), Industrial Design (1), Product Design (1), Professional Organizations (1), E-Commerce (1), Enterprise Software (1), Computers and Software (1), Databases (1), Information Storage (1), Telecommunications (1)
This is a question that is difficult to answer since there is no set definition for Web 2.0 ... basically, it indicates that a site is customer driven; the content and data are generated by and managed by the people that use the site, rather than by the individuals that generate the code that supports the site.
I have no idea.
Karl S
Principal Consultant | Digital Architect | CSM | MBCS
Best Answers in: Business Development (1), E-Commerce (1), Databases (1), Web Development (1)
Web 2.0 is simply a framework that holds user generated content.
It can be established around a specific focus or can allow users to create its definition by customer relationship management and integration of user requests into the framework.
If you want to know more please contact me project@paradigm-interactions.co.uk
Regards
Karl Smith
WAA,IAI,UPA,ACM,BCS
Clarification added January 8, 2008:
I think the technology viewpoint might be misdirection as technologies come and go what should lead a web 2.0 project the question of interaction.
What are the key interactions that define a successful process or task?
These interactions may consist on multiple nodes of activity, participants and resultant deliveries of information or view points into information.
This view relates to research I carried out in 2004-06 and is the foundation of my working practices.
Jim C
Information Technology Consultant, Architect, Coach and Thought Leader
Best Answers in: Advertising (1), Corporate Governance (1), E-Commerce (1), Web Development (1)
Web 2.0 is merely a label. It is used to recognize and to distinguish what we have learned from our experience on the web thus far. It permits us as customers of web sites to differentiate "good" from "better." What have we learned? Better web sites are interactive and immersive. They are fast and use resources wisely. They are useful and sticky. Good examples of Web 2.0 can be found in all genres across the web. New sites launch each day. Perhaps it would be helpful to explore what moves a site to Web 2.0 or even Web 3.0 for that matter? For this, I recommend studying what makes a good web site and how to sites better. Your first step in this study should be the book, "The Design of Sites: Patterns for Creating Wining Web Sites" by Douglas K. Van Duyne, James A. Landay and Jason I. Hong, now in its second edition. Here you will find lots of examples across all site genres and the specific principles involved in moving toward "better" from "good."
I think a "Web 2.0" site is one that has incorporated many of the more advanced technologies and design theories that have emerged from the past five years of Internet growth. While these include many that you mentioned -- user generated content, community, collaberation -- I think it also includes advanced analytics to deliver more highly relevant content, more rich media, better search and a greater degree of personalization and customization. In short, the "dialogue" between user and site and user and business is more the focus and relevancy is the key.
All The Web 2.0 you could ever ask for.
http://www.go2web20.net/
Links:
<sarcasm mode>
Test it by yourself by using the Web 2.0 validator
http://web2.0validator.com/
;-)
</sarcasm mode>
