Yes, I was one of those. I was initially less than excited about the term Web 2.0. It seemed like just so much marketing fluff to describe a trend in web applications that was not necessarily technological in nature, nor did it really alter the way in which the web was used, or add to its intended use.
I gradually softened that stance as I realized a few things:
- There was, actually, a subtle difference that was nevertheless readily discernible, separating current web applications from those of previous generations. If people wanted to wrap the subset of those differences in a term, and call them “web 2.0″ to facilitate easier communication, okay.
- A number of tech writers I respect had no problem with the term. I don’t blindly follow personalities, but if you respect someone you tend to give them a little extra consideration before dismissing their ideas.
- Finally, it became quite clear that the term ‘web 2.0′ was here to stay, and I was a little weary of feeling like an elderly buggy-whip manufacturer shaking my fist at those young whippersnappers in their Model Ts. So I caved in. You want me to call it web 2.0? Okay fine. It’s web 2.0. There.
That was it, then. War over, ‘web 2.0′ gained or earned some semblance of meaning, everyone knew what it was, nobody cared anymore. Right?
No, this is the internet. We can’t stop yet. Someone has to start describing web 3.0. Okay, we get it. You’re enthusiastic. That’s great. Just take a deep breath, have a seat, over there by the comic books, and relax for a minute. Feel better? Good.
Just the other day I saw the Web 4.0 manifesto. Now, to be fair, the author was being facetious with the naming convention. Unfortunately, in this era of social media gurus popping out of the woodwork overnight, it is (sadly) all too believable that, were a web 4.0 bandwagon to spring into existence, there would be countless citizens of the web willing to jump on board, wave the flag, and buy the t-shirt.
Here’s a thought. If we want to see the next evolution, whatever that is, of the platform we call “the web”, let’s wait until we, or someone, builds something on or around it that is so groundbreaking, so innovative, so paradigm-shattering, that it demands to be called by another name.
But not until then. And hopefully, if and when that day arrives, we can think of something better than web n.0 to describe it.
I quite agree. The point of the post was really a call to action around the idea that would could be doing so much more with the web, and using technology as a driver is really isn't helping!
The whole “Web 4.0″ thing was a bit unnecessary really. It just seemed like a decent hook to hang the idea on, but in retrospect I should have made the satire more obvious. Oh well. Luckily, my blog doesn't exactly have a massive readership!
Hey Rob. Yeah, wasn't knocking your post, per se, though I guess seeing 'web 4.0' written down is part of what sparked it.
I can be a bit of a cynic at times, but I still enjoy watching the web grow & evolve. I'd just rather wait till it evolves to pin a name on the next evolution.
Hehe… no, I didn't think you were.
It's just funny that my post was sparked off by being annoyed at the whole “web x.x” thing in the first place, and then a lot of people thought I was advocating it!