Berners-Lee Disses Web 2.0
I can't resist posting an excerpt from the Tim Berners-Lee podcast with IBM. This should hopefully put the matter of 'what is web 2.0' to rest, permanantly:
LANINGHAM: "You know, with Web 2.0, a common explanation out there is Web 1.0 was about connecting computers and making information available; and Web 2 is about connecting people and facilitating new kinds of collaboration. Is that how you see Web 2.0?"
BERNERS-LEE: "Totally not. Web 1.0 was all about connecting people. It was an interactive space, and I think Web 2.0 is of course a piece of jargon, nobody even knows what it means. 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."
For good measure, Sir Tim adds:
"And in fact, you know, this Web 2.0, quote, it means using the standards which have been produced by all these people working on Web 1.0. It means using the document object model, it means for HTML and SCG and so on, it's using HTTP, so it's building stuff using the Web standards, plus Java script of course.
So Web 2.0 for some people it means moving some of the thinking client side so making it more immediate, but the idea of the Web as interaction between people is really what the Web is. That was what it was designed to be as a collaborative space where people can interact."
FOLLOW RWW ON TWITTER
RECENT JOBS
Comments
Subscribe to comments for this post OR Subscribe to comments for all ReadWriteWeb posts
Great quotes. I remember the phrase 'Web 2.0' being bandied around in 1999, when I was Editor of Internet Monthly magazine. Thankfully, it didn't catch on at the time but it seems to have caught on now for the same reasons: marketing and jargon so that web designers can get more business.
Posted by: Paul Bradshaw | August 23, 2006 5:04 AM
Hah!
Posted by: Joshua Porter | August 23, 2006 10:27 AM
What many "Web 2.0" proselytizers fail to take into account is the fact that the default mode for human interaction has always been, and will always be, face-to-face conversation.
Which is to say, most people don't want to conduct their social lives online. At best, it's kinda dull. At worst, it's kinda creepy!
Posted by: Marcello | August 23, 2006 10:27 AM
"Web 2.0" reminds me of "Business 2.0". In other words, a naff name devised for the benefit of marketroids more than anyone else.
Berners-Lee is quite right to deflate the ridiculous hype surrounding Wibble 2.0...
Posted by: Juha | August 23, 2006 2:29 PM
+1 to Marcello
Posted by: Sergey | August 24, 2006 4:39 AM
Well we all know not to buy a 1.0 product, that version 2.0 is the one that delivers what it should have been all along!
Posted by: Jeff Tupholme | August 24, 2006 6:42 AM
I attempted to trackback this post, but it's not showing up. Any idea why, Richard?
My point was similar to Jeff's, btw.
Posted by: Andrew | August 25, 2006 9:53 PM
Web 2.0, what crap! Pure marketing bull***t, to make more money from something that isn't there.
Posted by: Kenny Lim | August 25, 2006 10:39 PM
TBL's right. Web 2.0 is, basically, nothing more than using the web the way it wants to be used.
Posted by: phil jones | August 26, 2006 5:48 PM
Even if 2.0 is jargon, I get the feeling that all the stuff we fought for originally is now coming true at a more rapid pace. It's almost like everyone is finally getting on the same page. The apps we talked about building 5 years ago are now reality. Although it's technically much more, I'd sum up my current 2.0 explanation as being a giant deep-breath after the last big exhale (bubble). For me, it's a renewed optimism for what's possible on the web.
-Brent
Posted by: Brent | August 28, 2006 3:36 AM
You are like sheep 'baaa-ing' out the same chorus. Web 2.0 *is* different for precisely the reason Brent mentions - 'renewed optimism for what's possible'. Web 2.0 is different because 10 years ago you couldn't have a YouTube; you had struggling versions of 'community' but nothing like My Space; you had bulletin boards but nothing like the current power of blogging. TB-L is correct in saying that this is what the web was *intended* to be in the first place - but it wasn't, and now it is. Web 2.0 is about a critical mass of users and the bandwidth to let them do things, AND developers who are ready to give away tools for building. As one who started leveraging the interent for business in 1995, this is a different era. Don't like the name 'Web 2.0'? Fine - call it what you want. But have the intelligence and creativity to see it.
Posted by: Mark | August 28, 2006 10:59 AM
The early web *was* about people communicating. Unfortunately they had to be savvy enough to run a server and write HTML. This limited who could participate early on. It is perhaps obvious now that the revolution is well under way but the real potential of users communicating with each other was untapped until blogs, flickr, YouTube, MySpace, and the rest made it easy for anyone to say something on the web (agreeing with Mark.)
Now some are taking this trend even further by making the very fabric of the web maleable to end users. CoComment, GreaseMonkey, Diigo, and now Trailfire are all trying to let users have their say anywhere and have the web their way. They all (to varying degrees)let end users change the web, add to it, remix and rewire it. I kind of like the term Social Web but whatever you call it the idea, aside from any over-hyped term, is pretty big.
Posted by: Pat | August 29, 2006 12:33 PM