Quote:
Originally Posted by ANMMark
That list fairly accurate, but a little general.
Basically what they have outlined is Web 1.0 which was static, not always user-friendly, and sometimes down right cumbersome (albeit sometimes attractive), moving torward a more social scene, where data is not just created by one person for the world to view, but created and shared by many for the benefit of everyone.
The concept behind Web 2.0 makes the internet an interesting place again (sometimes dangerous, but none-the-less interesting).
With web 1.0 concept, you have a webmaster creating content, for example, and visitors viewing/reading....done.
With Web 2.0 concept, you have a webmaster who creates a platform for others to contribute ideas, opinions, and content, for visitors to read & view, and then also continue the cycle by contributing their own opinions, ideas, and content, and the circle continues.
So yeah, I think the above list is fair, slightly outdated as new technologies emerge, but still a fair comparison.
|
You know, I really have learned a lot thanks to your input, Mark and that of others here, all joking aside. I'm very grateful.
I was racking my brains there to see if I could come up with something which might come under it to make sure I'm grasping it correctly.
So would something like RSS feeds which are seen on a lot of websites and blogs these days be considered more Web 2.0 than Web 1.0? They're interactive, encourage the visitor to play a more than passive role aside from simply viewing and most news type item have a comment option somewhere. The only chink in the armor I can see is that you get taken elsewhere to read them...
Yes, no, maybe?
Thanks for letting me think aloud.