28
July
2006

From New Media to Web 2.0 00:12 on Friday

Last night I started on a somewhat tongue-in-cheek post about the differences of working on the web back in 1996 (when I started) and in 2006 (now). Because the draft started to get really lengthy and the topics wide and varied, and most importantly because I had great fun writing it, I thought to split it up in smaller chunks. So here goes.

The format is about listing a concept from ten years ago and what’s approximately equivalent today.

1996 – New Media

It might be hard to believe, but before Web 2.0 there was the new-new media, and if you’re old enough to remember, before that there was New Media. Like Web 2.0, New Media was cool. At least with everyone glued to the huge, all new 21″(!) CRT monitors and free cocktails.

2006 – Web 2.0

A year ago my friends who actually have companies to run were ignorant about Web 2.0. Now they’re extatic. What happened? Web 2.0 might be old already with the über-geeks, but it’s only now starting to be common enough a term to make the basic business of web agancies easier: selling websites. So, geeks rejoice. Somebody other than Yahoo might even buy some AJAX from you.

5 Responses to “From New Media to Web 2.0”

    Links from my other posts:

  1. /personal » Blog Archive » From Interactive Agencies to Agency 2.0
  2. Comments:

  3. Marjut Says:

    …but the customer still knows nothing about Web 2.0. Absolutely nothing. They might know about Flickr or YouTube, but the whole Web 2.0 concept is out of their reach. What should we do about that, or should we just keep the whole term to ourselves?

  4. Niko Says:

    If you slapped a “Web 2.0 Ready” badge on a site right now, it would probably only confuse some and make others laugh. (hmm.. maybe I should start designing the badge ;)

    So I say let’s keep it. It’s a fuzzy all-inclusive term anyway. To inflict a new label or abbreviation on customers I think it should be very well defined and most importantly, provide value. Just make a site work and the concept version number doesn’t matter.

  5. Murk Says:

    IMHO practical examples are the only way to sell new technology to clients. If you show what can be achieved through Web 2.0 vs. any old web app (37 signals stuff is great, even GMail has some nifty features) most clients will get the point. From a client’s (or user’s) point-of-view it doesn’t maybe matter if it’s Flash 8 or Web 2.0, but it’s up to the designers and developers to propose solutions that “make the web more usable / a better place” (okay, that sounded sooo lame).

    /off-topic/ Looking back the memory lane I remember trying to pitch the idea of cutting up their TV-commercial into “an interactive” game of some sorts. It seemed to go down the drain, but then I realized that I had to show them (this was before most of the excellent F&B Volvo and J&C campaigns) them something. And after showing Hi-Res’ Life Switch (http://www.lifeswitch.org/) it took 5 minutes to close the deal and start the project.

    Nothign spectacular, but the lesson is to always have some suitable examples (preferably foreign if you’re Finnish, as clients adore anything done outside Finland ;) up your sleeve. And naturally not just own references.

  6. Niko Says:

    Only today I was reading the chapter about Realness in the Sticky Wisdom book. It’s all about the importance of explaining ideas by showing something real, not just words.