Did I miss the memo? Does “Web 2.0” actually mean something now? Has it been released?
This article refers to “Web 2.0 applications like social networking sites, blogs, wikis and RSS feeds”. What makes those Web 2.0 applications? What about GMail, is that Web 2.0? Are any/all AJAX-based apps Web 2.0? Ruby on Rails?
I get the impression from that article that anything that gained lots of popularity/notoriety in 2006 (maybe even mid to late 2005) is Web 2.0.
Can anybody tell me exactly how to determine what is “Web 2.0” and what isn’t?
Is anybody working on Web 3.0 yet? Or even Web 2.1?
“Yes”. (for most of your questions)
Details on wikipedia.
[QUOTE=The Controvert]
“Yes”. (for most of your questions)
Details on wikipedia.
[/QUOTE]
:smack: Why didn’t it occur to me to check Wikipedia?
Is that ironic?
[QUOTE=The Wikipedia article]
…Others, notably Tim Berners-Lee, see the term as a needless and poorly-defined buzzword.
[/QUOTE]
I’m on your side, Tim.
IPv6 is more important, technically.
I think this sums up my feelings about the whole thing (from here, possibly NSFW):
[QUOTE=Lowtax]
I wouldn’t really be so up in arms over Web 2.0 if it wasn’t for the idiotic, pseudo-intellectual news sources like Wired Magazine and News.com splooging all over the concept of Web 2.0 while trying to shove a trash dumpster full of hip new jargon slang down our collective throats.
[/QUOTE]
…and with that, I think we’re ready for The Pit.
[QUOTE=garygnu]
IPv6 is more important, technically.
[/QUOTE]
How’s that coming along, anyway? At this rate, we’re going to be at Web 9.2 before I start worrying about IPv6. 
[QUOTE=MrSquishy]
How’s that coming along, anyway? At this rate, we’re going to be at Web 9.2 before I start worrying about IPv6.
[/QUOTE]
They’re working on it…
Web 2.0, in my experience, refers to websites so bloated that my poor (and not so old) laptop chokes while visiting them, especially when in power-saving mode.
A Pentium M at 600 mhz should be able to handle a mere webpage.
[QUOTE=tanstaafl]
They’re working on it…
[/QUOTE]
Like our board upgrades.
[QUOTE=lazybratsche]
Web 2.0, in my experience, refers to websites so bloated that my poor (and not so old) laptop chokes while visiting them, especially when in power-saving mode.
A Pentium M at 600 mhz should be able to handle a mere webpage.
[/QUOTE]
Odd, discounting those annoying flash pages, true web 2.0 web pages load much faster than other pages. Of course, what I consider web 2.0 is those sites like facebook.com and mozzilla.com which are light and simplistic.
Of course there are loads of newer sites that have quite a few images and flash intros and the like, but I hardly consider those 2.0.
But then you are on a 600 mhz, hehe.
[QUOTE=Epimetheus]
Odd, discounting those annoying flash pages, true web 2.0 web pages load much faster than other pages.
[/QUOTE]
Web 2.0 has nothing to do with page bloat or loading speed one way or the other. It’s a conceptual thing having to do with user involvement in the site. You can just as easily have slow sites in Web 2.0 as Web 1.0 or Web 99.0.
[QUOTE=garygnu]
IPv6 is more important, technically.
[/QUOTE]
Uhm, OK, maybe. And how is that related to Web 2.0?