I wouldn't really know. I generally laugh when I see articles talking about web 2.0 and by the time they talk about web 3.0 I'm wiping tears from my eyes. I think web 2.0 is websites with the letter "r" on the end of the name.
I could tell you what _I_ think the change from Web 1.0 to Web 2.0 was - which was largely: "static pages" -> "pages generated in realtime" (i.e. database-backed content management systems like LJ) "Web sites as separate islands" -> "web sites bringing data together from numerous places" (i.e. things like RSS and XML data exchange meaning your data isn't locked up on one site) "Updates that require page refreshes" -> "pages that can update their data in situ" (i.e. things like Google Calendar where you can drag/drop your entries and it updates without having to interrupt you)
People coming at it from different directions talk about the social side of the web, but I figure that small amounts of that have been going on from the very beginning - it's just that we hit a critical mass of it only in 2002/3-ish that meant that you could start to assume you'd find people you knew online rather than the opposite.
Except that (a)Virtual worlds are _not_ the web. They are other software also running on the internet. (b)Who the hell wants to use a virtual world to buy a book, read LJ or listen to music?
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif){kind=small}
no subject
no subject
"static pages" -> "pages generated in realtime" (i.e. database-backed content management systems like LJ)
"Web sites as separate islands" -> "web sites bringing data together from numerous places" (i.e. things like RSS and XML data exchange meaning your data isn't locked up on one site)
"Updates that require page refreshes" -> "pages that can update their data in situ" (i.e. things like Google Calendar where you can drag/drop your entries and it updates without having to interrupt you)
People coming at it from different directions talk about the social side of the web, but I figure that small amounts of that have been going on from the very beginning - it's just that we hit a critical mass of it only in 2002/3-ish that meant that you could start to assume you'd find people you knew online rather than the opposite.
no subject
The consensus generally seems to be that web 3.0 is 3D / virtual world web 2.0.
In MIT I am told web 2.0 is SOOO last Tuesday.
no subject
(a)Virtual worlds are _not_ the web. They are other software also running on the internet.
(b)Who the hell wants to use a virtual world to buy a book, read LJ or listen to music?