I'm a consultant and a flash developer, with former careers in graphic design, web strategy, and music production. My goal is to create better experiences through code, design, and talking about the business value of good user experiences.
This entry was posted
on Monday, November 13th, 2006 at 20:01 and is filed under English, Tumblelog.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.
Eh. I think there is too much talk about the theoretical dangers/trends/definitions of Web 2.0, and too little figuring out of the real-world potential. So many Web 2.0 sites are geared towards the already tech-savvy, who will notice the cool coding, ooh and aah about the drag and drop interface, and realize that maybe Explorer is what’s messing the site up.
What about the people who don’t particularly LIKE being online? Make a site that is worth it to them, and you’ve got something. Flickr works because at some point even my grumpy father starts to think “I’ve got too many pictures to organize…” Flickr makes his life easier, allowing him to spend LESS time on the computer. Many of the Web 2.0 sites I’ve seen rely on cliques of people that all decide to join in a group, like choosing a favorite football team or a calling plan. Then we sit on these sites, happily linked, maybe inanely IM:ing “whatcha up to?”, wasting time and life. I get as excited by the newest tech as the next person, but for me the party is a little bit over, and now I want these sites to give me REAL value and functionality, not sparkly new oooh cool value. The Web 1.0 bubble was all about failed “My website about puppies will make MILLIONS” crap. Those sites that always had fundamental real value survived.
I think there are sites that manifest all the 2.0 qualities, but are not labeled as “web 2.0″ because those exact 2.0 geeks are not using those sites. Props to Tim O’Reilly for trying to emphasize again and again his vision of web 2.0, and that it’s a lot more than coming up with new sites.
Re non-geek users, those who don’t breath the web, I agree fully. (Although as much as I like Flickr, it creeps out even some of my computer-savvy but not web-2.0-savvy friends… unfortunately) And as you say, the 2.0 wow is wearing out. Where’s the beef? How is your yet-another-powered-by-AJAX bookmarking service making the world better?
For me it’s kind of like when Crayola came out with neon colored crayons, and every kid started drawing with those first, because they were so new and cool. Now it’s time to take that cool neon and use it where it’s useful and it fits, not all over the place. Sometimes for certain applications the best kind of website is just a page of nicely laid-out text on a plain background, and nothing else.
On the other hand, neon can be very useful, and opens new possibilities, many of which can indeed make the world that much better. But I think one should still see it for what it is–one option among many, with its own set of benefits and drawbacks.