Why do we use a lousy term like Web 2.0 ?
As most technical people I dislike definitions that are fuzzy. I like to see that something IS or IS NOT. But on the other hand what people want to say when they talk about Web 2.0 is good. I like the tools that fit the Web 2.0 label. I believe Indivirtual sees the opportunities for our clients. So most likely I will keep using the term. I did have to laugh reading this on http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2005/10/21.html and I kind of agree with Joel :
The term Web 2.0 particularly bugs me. It's not a real concept. It has no meaning. It's a big, vague, nebulous cloud of pure architectural nothingness. When people use the term Web 2.0, I always feel a little bit stupider for the rest of the day.
To quote the line from Billy Madison:
Principal: Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
Billy Madison: Okay, a simple no would've done just fine.
technorati tags:web2.0
geplaatst door Ian om 21:48
1 Reacties:
Here's an interesting article about web 2.0 from Paul Graham: http://www.paulgraham.com/web20.html.
It's rather long but worth reading.
My favorite quote:
"The fact that Google is a "Web 2.0" company shows that, while meaningful, the term is also rather bogus. It's like the word "allopathic." It just means doing things right, and it's a bad sign when you have a special word for that."
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home