A year ago I asked how people define Web 2.0. Now that a year has gone by, I wonder what the perception of Web 3.0 will be. The word may be hype, or even a buzz word, but it will be used as a business term. Using your personal opinion (and not citing an expert), what do you think will be the definition and components of Web 3.0?
What will be the definition of Web 3.0? Is there such a thing, or is it more a gimmick or sci-fi buzz word?
Web 2.0 has been entrenched in the minds of consumers and has pushed up into corporate settings, gaining influence in daily operations, procedures and methods of how employees interact on projects. The definition of Web 2.0 has undergone a few updates since it was originally introduced by Tim O'Reilly with O'Reilly himself even updating his original definition.
The notion of the next phase of "Web version X" has been a push towards the Semantic Web. Web 2.0 failed to deliver the Semantic Web that many have envisioned and in terms of a formalized software release (the Web is obviously not a software release). To use a corporate software metaphor, the Semantic Web as envisioned has been deferred until the public release Web 3.0. In other words, the Semantic Web as envisioned might be a long ways away.
Or is it?
The concept of advanced Internet intelligence is currently being engrained into algorithm updates to how consumers search for goods and services in their daily lives on search engines such as Google, Yahoo! and MSN. The integration of maps, peer reviews and focus on presenting the individual searcher with various distribution channels of information has changed our understanding of the Web. This has been further compounded with a real-time ability to exert a sense of urgency with mobile web technology.
Mobile Web Technology and Web 3.0:
The emergence of mobile web technology, especially outside of the United States has showcased the ability for economical solutions that can become engrained within consumer behavior and universal human culture. The gap between mobile and desktop-based browsing is immense. Web 3.0, or whatever other names it will be called will need to be able to bridge the gap of the mobile user to the PC user with a common platform that can act as an abstract in the mobile world. Buzz word or not, many understand the word "Web 3.0" and have an opinion about its definition and what it will mean. As these technologies and concepts come to reality the consumer and business community will find new ways to bridge communication and solve problems at home and in the business setting.
- Keith Hanks 7/29/08
June 2008
Derek Sedlack - To think about the Internet as a large collection of information systems, or information points, would provide some context into the means of providing a definition in terms of adaptation and utilization.
Version 1.0 was developed for intercommunication and quickly evolved into a massive repository of data, sometimes codified into meaningful information, but still lacking any real quality control or properly defined boundaries. The World Wide Web 1.0 can be categorized by what it was used for: data aggregation or collection with some dissemination.
Version 2.0 began taking into account how the structure and information was used in a broader collection of community tools such as redefined searching algorithms, targeted marketing tools based on collected data points, and shared personal points in MySpace and YouTube, but few contain a meaningful valuation in the true sense of Knowledge Management as envisioned by Davenport or Strassmann. While the utilitarian aspect has grown exponentially (support sites, order entry/fulfillment), the Internet has also become a major source of stale information due to temporal rationalization and the fractal flattening effect, http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/els/00401625/1995/00000048/00000002/art00045;jsessionid=9boege6c04mla.alice?format=print. Public usage sites like Wikipedia have attempted to reverse the direction through information destruction and open updates, but credibility remains a stable concern.
Following this line of logic: what and how this network of computers has been utilized and extrapolate into the next decade, perhaps Version 3.0 could be construed as who will use the information. Instead of simply throwing up a video of my uncle assembling his kitchen cabinets, the codification process will interlink the data with alternate, viable uses such as How-To sites, tech support sites, or group sites intent on human betterment. Interlinks would cause concern with anyone interested in personal privacy: Google stored search data, coupled with Email and purchasing habits builds a frighteningly accurate personal profile on every person connected with or without cognoscence or consent.
I can see more inter-corporate cooperation fitting into the mold of Web 3.0 and who will use the information more than simple how and what integration. Companies creating real partnerships that leverage codified, explicit knowledge to form new, tacit foundations will provide another rapid growth economy. What country takes advantage of this potential future remains in the eyes of history, but the U.S. is certainly poised to integrated underdeveloped cultures into the mix of mainstream engineering and service-oriented architectures. With knowledge and freedom come security issues that may require companies to re-invest in the eastern philosophy of long-term employment.
Sourav Sharma - Web 3.0 is the professionalization of 2.0. Users tools for creating their own content are accelerating even as big media places more of its prized TV shows, music videos, and news stories online.
The line between professional and amateur content will blur, but more importantly, media properties and personal lives will mingle in new ways.
Marco Kotrotsos - definition: The web not only as data, but with meaning. As the Semantic web will take form, knowledge will get linked together. Search will get better because not only can we search by content but by context aswel.
Incredicorp is looking for people willing to participate in discussions about these kinds of topics by the way...
Marco (marco@incredicorp.com)
Glenn Curry - Well it is hard to say. Maybe Web 3.0 is what is left of the ashes of the failed nonsense called Web 2.0?
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/04/29/web_optimisation_figures_bloat/
"Web 2.0 bloat trebles web's waistline
The web is getting fatter faster than a middle-aged November goose on an all-spaghetti diet, thanks to webmasters and bloggers greasing their pages with Web 2.0 lard.
The mean size of a web page has more than trebled since 2003 from 97.3KB to more than 312KB, according to a review of available research by WebsiteOptimization.com."
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/05/27/web20_and_copyright/
"Failing Web 2.0 stars pray for copyright abolition
VC money is drying up, investors can see that there's precious little to show for Web 2.0 in terms of sustainable businesses.
Web 2.0 failed to address any of the significant technical challenges of the day. Which, alas, has proved true - even after VCs have spunked $1.5bn of cash at the Javascript kiddies, we're no nearer to solving these problems. That's because Web 2.0 was "interface" level people trying to solve "infrastructure" level problems - which is a bit like supposing that a talent for painting garden gnomes qualifies you for designing skyscrapers that don't fall over.)"
Clarification Added:
Hmmm, a lot did not make it somehow...
Web 2.0 fails to produce cash
“There is going to be a shake-out here in the next year or two” as many Web 2.0 companies disappear, said Roger Lee, a partner at Battery Ventures.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/6c968990-2b4c-11dd-a7fc-000077b07658.html?nclick_check=1
Failing Web 2.0 stars pray for copyright abolition
VC money is drying up, investors can see that there's precious little to show for Web 2.0 in terms of sustainable businesses.
Web 2.0 failed to address any of the significant technical challenges of the day. Which, alas, has proved true - even after VCs have spunked $1.5bn of cash at the Javascript kiddies, we're no nearer to solving these problems. That's because Web 2.0 was "interface" level people trying to solve "infrastructure" level problems - which is a bit like supposing that a talent for painting garden gnomes qualifies you for designing skyscrapers that don't fall over.)
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/05/27/web20_and_copyright/
Raoul Gomes -
Web 1.0 = Black and white, one dimensional
Web 2.0 = Slick look with a two dimensional feel
Web 3.0 = Easier and different ways to interact with the web in a more 3Dimensional environment.
The best example to demonstrate this idea is the PicLens WebApp used in viewing multiple images on websites. Makes browsing so much quicker!
The new web (3.0) will allow us to be more efficient, have a more enjoyable experience, and be less cumbersome to use or learn to use by being more intuitive.
Return to Keith Hanks Home
Contact: Keith@KeithHanks.com, Webmaster@KeithHanks.com