What Does Web 3.0 Mean To You? Would Like To Know What You Think......

51 replies
Everyone,

I was on a web conference the other day where it was highly interactive (25 participants). The website the host was using was being updated in near-real time and was writing ideas on a white board that we could all see. Then someone shouted out something I have never heard before, "man, this is very web 3.0!:"

Someone replied with, "hey, there's no such thing as web 3.0, lay off the crack pipe!"

Of course we all laughed, but then we started talking about the next evolution of the web. It was a fascinating discussion. While web 3.0 may not exist yet, I would love to pick your Warrior grey matter. Think about the next evolution of websites/ blogs / <insert you favorite name here> and what does web 3.0 it mean to you? To my way of thinking it's going to go way beyond anything Facebook, Twitter, etc. does now......

RoD "If-Coffee-Could-Absorb-Oxygen-I'd-Get-A-Transfusion" Cortez
#web
  • Profile picture of the author Kevin Birch
    Lots of folks still haven't worked out what Web 2.0 is yet, never mind Web 3.0

    In fact some will ask if Web 1.0 been quantified yet?
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1498259].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author MisterMunch
    Is the iPhone maybe web 3.0?

    I think the web 3.0 is going away from the computer and into other devices. Like being able to view movies online directly from your tv or being pinged on your digital watch if Liverpool scores a goal.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1498332].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Keith Boisvert
      The internet is a fad and will go the way of the 8-track and beta video players soon....just you see!!

      I think that the 3.0 revolution will be a lot more interactive and intuitive than it is now. Something that really integrates more with our lives(yes, even more) and what we see online is directly what we want to see based on US and our individual likes and tastes, and that is not just search results, but the content on websites as well.

      Not sure if this makes any sense.

      keith
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1498364].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Jill Carpenter
        It's my understanding that with the new google wave you could all be seeing these words directly as I am typing them.

        I think that is the direction of 3.0 - going toward more live interaction.

        I think we'll see Web 2.5 next. Not ready for a full 3.0 LOL
        Signature

        "May I have ten thousand marbles, please?"

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1498387].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Dan C. Rinnert
          Originally Posted by avenuegirl View Post

          It's my understanding that with the new google wave you could all be seeing these words directly as I am typing them.

          I think that is the direction of 3.0 - going toward more live interaction.
          You mean like the old "Web 1.0" stuff like chatrooms and AIM?

          I would have a tendency to think any "live" interaction would be more of a fad. The "live" stuff comes and goes.

          Look where we're all discussing this: a forum.

          How very "Web 1.0".
          Signature

          Dan's content is irregularly read by handfuls of people. Join the elite few by reading his blog: dcrBlogs.com, following him on Twitter: dcrTweets.com or reading his fiction: dcrWrites.com but NOT by Clicking Here!

          Dan also writes content for hire, but you can't afford him anyway.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1498649].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author jamiedolan
          Originally Posted by avenuegirl View Post

          It's my understanding that with the new google wave you could all be seeing these words directly as I am typing them.
          Yep, Google wave is real time. It has been quite fast in my testing. Almost no delay on most text.
          Signature
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1498747].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author KristiDaniels
    I wrote an article entitled "Web 3.0 is Here" on my blog:

    Announcement: Web 3.0

    Here is an excerpt:

    In Web 2.0, we have comments, voting, surveys and other user interaction. The web page is no longer static. The individual users of the site can actually change the site.

    In Web 3.0, we have everything present in Web 2.0, PLUS we now have the post itself evolving. The data in the post is no longer static. Our algorithm brethren now get to contribute to the community. And the surrounding text is even under test and may be worded differently when you see the post tomorrow.

    The catch word for Web 2.0 is "democracy." But democracies are flawed. Groups of people often make bad decisions based on faulty information.

    What we really want and need is democracy WITH access to the underlying factual data.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1498412].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author TheRichJerksNet
    There is no web 1.0 - web 2.0 - web x.x - All Web 2.0 was the same technologies that have been advanced such as XML, AJAX, and etc..

    Many get consufed and think the web has had an upgrade or something and this is fasle. It's the same web just more and different technology is being used now vs 20 years ago.

    The term web 2.0 was made up ... It was just a coin phrase ...

    James
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1498528].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Rod Cortez
      Originally Posted by TheRichJerksNet View Post

      There is no web 1.0 - web 2.0 - web x.x - All Web 2.0 was the same technologies that have been advanced such as XML, AJAX, and etc..

      Many get consufed and think the web has had an upgrade or something and this is fasle. It's the same web just more and different technology is being used now vs 20 years ago.

      The term web 2.0 was made up ... It was just a coin phrase ...

      James
      For being a coin phrase, it sure is everywhere. Businessweek, The Wall Street Journal, and other periodicals mention it. Large research firms write reports regarding Web 2.0 and sell them for a hefty sum. I'm learning today that it doesn't mean much to some people and that's interesting. I see where you're coming from though, which is why I'm asking the Warriors what 3.0 means to them, if anything at all.

      RoD
      Signature
      "Your personal philosophy is the greatest determining factor in how your life works out."
      - Jim Rohn
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1498561].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author TheRichJerksNet
        Originally Posted by Rod Cortez View Post

        For being a coin phrase, it sure is everywhere. Businessweek, The Wall Street Journal, and other periodicals mention it. Large research firms write reports regarding Web 2.0 and sell them for a hefty sum. I'm learning today that it doesn't mean much to some people and that's interesting. I see where you're coming from though, which is why I'm asking the Warriors what 3.0 means to them, if anything at all.

        RoD
        I can't locate the video but I am sure if someone does some searching they can find it. I think it was google or microsoft that put out the video which explained it was only a coined phrase that was made up to explain advanced technologies...

        Since them many have used the term in many different ways such as webdesign 2.0 and etc .. Fact is there is no webdesign 2.0..

        James
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1498634].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author KristiDaniels
    Everything exists only conceptually.

    Einstein was wrong you know. Quantum physics is the currently accepted model.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1498553].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Kevin Riley
    Originally Posted by Rod Cortez View Post

    Everyone,

    I was on a web conference the other day where it was highly interactive (25 participants). The website the host was using was being updated in near-real time and was writing ideas on a white board that we could all see. Then someone shouted out something I have never heard before, "man, this is very web 3.0!:"

    Someone replied with, "hey, there's no such thing as web 3.0, lay off the crack pipe!"

    Of course we all laughed, but then we started talking about the next evolution of the web. It was a fascinating discussion. While web 3.0 may not exist yet, I would love to pick your Warrior grey matter. Think about the next evolution of websites/ blogs / <insert you favorite name here> and what does web 3.0 it mean to you? To my way of thinking it's going to go way beyond anything Facebook, Twitter, etc. does now......

    RoD "If-Coffee-Could-Absorb-Oxygen-I'd-Get-A-Transfusion" Cortez
    C'mon! Web 3.0 is so 2009. I'm on Web 4.0. Cortez, you better get more caffeine in your system and catch up.
    Signature
    Kevin Riley, long-time Warrior living in Osaka, Japan

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1498648].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author KristiDaniels
    Forums may be one of the very earliest experiments in what became Web 2.0. This is content created by the users of the site rather than the Webmaster.

    To be truly Web 2.0 though, you can't have a boss at the top vetoing things (at least as a matter of course). You have to at least have the illusion that it is the users who determine the content.

    Guess what recently happened with the Warrior forum? It went to user moderation. That is a pure Web 2.0 concept.

    On Web 2.0 sites that are billed as Web 2.0 (like Digg for instance), the users get really pissed off and verbal when the owners of the site manually kick something off the front page. They feel entitled to control that destiny themselves along with the scoring algorithm.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1498673].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author smokemon
      Users have been able to add/edit/control content online long before digg or any other "web 2.0" sites came along. What's changed is the sheer number of people doing it, along with the ease and visibility that's found today. There really weren't any technical hurdles keeping a site like digg from popping up years before it did.

      "Web 2.0" was more about following trends than having anything to do with the technical developments of the web. What's hot right now? Connecting with people? Great! Throw some things together using technologies that already exist packaged in a way that looks new/hot/trendy/whatever. Slap a name on it, say "Web 2.0," to create hype. As other marketing efforts jump on the buzz bandwagon suddenly you have a snowball effect and the term gains widespread use & popularity w/o ever having to MEAN anything. Another real world example: "blog".

      As a long-time internet user, NOC admin, and self-described geek/nerd the term means exactly what "Web 2.0" meant to me: absolutely nothing. Maybe I'll adjust my filters to keep the crap out of my inbox, and maybe I'll hear annoying questions and comments from friends and family about that "new Web 3.0 thing", but that's about it.

      As a marketer, it means dollar signs to me. If your in the snowball once it starts gaining speed just ride on the back of the trend and collect the whole time. Talk about the next big thing after "Web 2.0" has been around since the term itself. It's just a matter of being at the right place at the right time when it starts to happen.

      As I was saying before, the term "Web 2.0" never even had a real set definition. Just everyone's take on it and such. I suppose the general IDEA of "Web 2.0" was more interactivity. So perhaps instead of asking what "Web 3.0" means to us, maybe you could try going about defining what it means or should mean and push it upon the masses. If it sticks, well there you go. Write an ebook about how to create a buzzword and sell it for $97.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1498800].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author xiaophil
      'Web 3.0', 'next gen', or whatever you label it...

      In a nutshell:

      It's when the information you want, finds you.

      Ubiquitous low-latency, real-time, event-driven systems.

      Think web-hooks triggering custom scriptlets, and pubsub distribution over fat pings.

      That is where we're going.


      Remember there are three kinds of people: those that make things happen, those that watch things happen, and those that wonder what just happened.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1498817].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author mywebwork
    Sir Tim Berners-Lee, the creator of the World Wide Web describes it as follows:

    People keep asking what Web 3.0 is. I think maybe when you've got an overlay of scalable vector graphics - everything rippling and folding and looking misty -- on Web 2.0 and access to a semantic Web integrated across a huge space of data, you'll have access to an unbelievable data resource."
    My interpretation is that Web 3.0 moves the web from being focused on individual web sites to becoming a collection of applications that run on multiple platforms and that interact with data sources around the globe.

    Of course if Microsoft was designing this we'd all need new computers with "Designed for Web 3.0" stickers on them!

    Bill
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1498713].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author rickkettner
    IMO, web 3.0 is when social influence powers everything from search to news. Video and audio-based content will be indexed, searchable, and the primary ways to consume information. Language barriers will be broken due to near perfect translation software... etc.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1498727].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author MarkAse
    I think web 3.0 is going to be the interaction not only of people online, but creating more interaction between friends. Phones will be able to tell you where your friends are, based on that information they can suggest which people in the bar you'd get along with, or if you and the woman on the stool next to you both know your friend Ted.

    Web 2.0 is the use of user generated content, the next step is how that content and the information that is stored about all of us is actually used.
    Signature

    My current project, the Uncorked Ventures Wine Club. More coming soon, here.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1498794].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Tony-
    I'm thinking the matrix here!! (ok maybe web 3.1)
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1498983].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Phil Ayres
    To me, Web 3.0 is artificial intelligence... a web that knows me so well that it knows what I want (or need) without me having to express it. That's next generation technology.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1498987].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Brad Gosse
    If Web 1.0 was publishers generating content for us to consume

    Web 2.0 was user generated content.

    Web 3.0 will likely be hive generated content. Take a look at what sites like Flickr are doing with photographs and tying them to dates, times, GPS locations and more. They will take how we look at the past from this point forward to a new level.

    Imagine being able to search the photos that were taken in your parents hometown when they were growing up. These are just some of the things our grandchildren will have access to.
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1498988].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author smokemon
    If Web 1.0 was publishers generating content for us to consume, then what web do I live in where users generate content for publishers to consume? ala article writing or content creation? Is that Web 2.0?

    Was my old geocities page Web 2.0 b/c I created it and allowed others to comment on it through a guest book? How about the old forums and bbs I used to frequent. Do they qualify for Web 2.0? Now that I think about it... Digg sure does look a LOT like a forum itself. But then again, online discussions have been happening for years. And that's just not "Web 2.0".

    And hey, wait a minute! These forums right here sort of have a hive concept going on, don't they? Everyone in the hive can contribute. Interesting... sort of like my geocities guest book from that old 'Web 1.0". Now my head's really going to explode!

    Web 2.0 - O'Reilly's greatest gift to the web
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1499137].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author tecHead
    I read somewhere, (Forbes, I think -- can't remember the article, right now), where the author summed it up in the equation...

    Web3 = (4C + P + VS)

    Which is the 4 C's..
    - Content
    - Community
    - Commerce
    - Context

    Plus Personalization plus Vertical Search

    Where we'll go to a site, (might not be Google; never know), to search for something like Cell Phones. But instead of getting an immediate list of SERPs after entering in our initial broad query.. we'll get a customized survey.

    This survey will ask us questions which will better customize our SERPs to us...

    What brand of cell phone do you prefer?
    Where do you live?
    What will you do most with your cell phone?
    Will you call over seas with your cell phone?
    How much will you surf the web on your cell phone?
    Do you run Windows or OSX?

    Fill in the survey; (which is formulated as a Vertical Search), and now we have handled Context & Personalization; the displayed information is in context to Cell Phones personalized to our preferences.

    Community comes into play as we browse through the cell phones specifically meeting our criteria and read through the reviews left by those that have bought those phones.

    Make a choice, click the button and now we're into Commerce and consequently once we make the purchase we're introduced automatically to a couple of usergroups and forums focused around people that have bought the same cell phone.

    Not only do we find that we have the cell phone in common but other related items... items we recommend to each other because we have similar interests. OH Yeah! The affiliate links are automatically appended to whatever reference we make to anyone; this Commerce information is saved in our personal cloud that we use to keep track of everything because we're so mobile now it doesn't make sense to not have access to this data where ever we go...

    I can guarantee you that privacy advocates will continue to fight an uphill battle against consumer convenience. Trust.

    George Orwell's "1984"; read it.

    PLP,
    tecHead
    Signature
    Learn Everything You Need to Know About CryptoCurrencies
    Automation is the primary conduit to successful relaxation
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1499403].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author TheRichJerksNet
    This thread is a perfect example of how someone can make up a word and it gets spread like wildfire and actual descriptions get created left and right for something that does not exist to begin with ... LOL

    The term is closely associated with Tim O'Reilly because of the O'Reilly Media Web 2.0 conference in 2004.[2][3] Although the term suggests a new version of the World Wide Web, it does not refer to an update to any technical specifications, but rather to cumulative changes in the ways software developers and end-users use the Web. Whether Web 2.0 is qualitatively different from prior web technologies has been challenged by World Wide Web inventor Tim Berners-Lee, who called the term a "piece of jargon"[4] -- precisely because he intended the Web to embody these values in the first place.

    Source: Web 2.0 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    James
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1499471].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author tecHead
      Originally Posted by TheRichJerksNet View Post

      This thread is a perfect example of how someone can make up a word and it gets spread like wildfire and actual descriptions get created left and right for something that does not exist to begin with ... LOL

      James
      heh -- yeah but if language didn't evolve from concept, then "Ugh unk pug moh thon, borq doh." would still be the only way to ask someone out to dinner.

      Signature
      Learn Everything You Need to Know About CryptoCurrencies
      Automation is the primary conduit to successful relaxation
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1499504].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author TheRichJerksNet
        Originally Posted by tecHead View Post

        heh -- yeah but if language didn't evolve from concept, then "Ugh unk pug moh thon, borq doh." would still be the only way to ask someone out to dinner.

        That is debatable that language was ever spoken as Ugh unk pug moh thon, borq doh

        Point being is that no such thing as web x.x exist... Language has always existed in some form or another so you are trying to compare a apple to an orange.

        James
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1499531].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author tecHead
          Originally Posted by TheRichJerksNet View Post

          That is debatable that language was ever spoken as Ugh unk pug moh thon, borq doh

          Point being is that no such thing as web x.x exist... Language has always existed in some form or another so you are trying to compare a apple to an orange.

          James
          "pug moh thon" is an actual ancient form of the Irish language; (at least that's what an Irish friend's Mother told me)

          Signature
          Learn Everything You Need to Know About CryptoCurrencies
          Automation is the primary conduit to successful relaxation
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1499544].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author TheRichJerksNet
            Originally Posted by tecHead View Post

            "pug moh thon" is an actual ancient form of the Irish language; (at least that's what an Irish friend's Mother told me)

            I am Irish :p Never heard tell of such caveman language ...

            James
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1499602].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Hesaidblissfully
              Web 3.0 will be a little jack that we plug into the back of our heads that allows us to upload our minds directly onto the web, like in the Matrix. Only with less Keanu Reeves.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1499632].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author smokemon
          You know tecHead, I sure hope you're wrong.

          What if I'm not trying to buy anything? What if I'm just cruising for general information? And what if, like most people, I don't feel like filling out a survey for marketing purposes to find said information? What if I don't want to be in a forum w/ other suckered men who bought that new MAKE MY WEENIE 10 FEET LONG pill after purchase? Seems like the new Web 3.0 is every marketer's wet dream, and every end-users nightmare.

          The vast majority of people online at any given point are users, NOT consumers. You may be able to convince a few users here and there to be consumers, but we don't all jump online everyday looking to bend over and pop open our wallets. Controlling what USERS see on the web in order to sell them something is a bad, bad decision. If I wanted that I'd turn on my radio, or open a newspaper, or watch TV. I wouldn't get online, and that's one of the reasons being on the web is so appealing to a lot of people, b/c it DOESN'T follow that traditional method.

          I already get spammed @ home w/ junk mail and telemarketer calls. I mean, I bought a car so I MUST be interested in insurance quotes, loans, trade-ins, etc., right? And since I'm interested already, why bother looking for it when I can have it jammed down my throat while I'm eating dinner w/ my family, or stuffing my mailbox, or clogging my screen/search engine results. At some point marketing begins to have the OPPOSITE effect on people. Usually coincides with how intrusive it is. Making me fill out a freakin survey to search the web falls along those lines. What google already does w/ personalized search is IMHO a million times better than what you or that Forbes article are suggesting will happen, and I doubt I'm far from the norm in that regard.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1499555].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author tecHead
            Originally Posted by smokemon View Post

            You know tecHead, I sure hope you're wrong.

            What if I'm not trying to buy anything? What if I'm just cruising for general information? And what if, like most people, I don't feel like filling out a survey for marketing purposes to find said information?...

            ...search is IMHO a million times better than what you or that Forbes article are suggesting will happen, and I doubt I'm far from the norm in that regard.
            ..beautiful thing about the Internet is there's always a link somewhere on the page to say "no thanks"... even if not, there's the "back button" built in.

            But, I agree with you to some extent... I hope I'm wrong too.. just don't think so. <shrug>
            Signature
            Learn Everything You Need to Know About CryptoCurrencies
            Automation is the primary conduit to successful relaxation
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1499575].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author smokemon
              Originally Posted by tecHead View Post

              ..beautiful thing about the Internet is there's always a link somewhere on the page to say "no thanks"... even if not, there's the "back button" built in.

              But, I agree with you to some extent... I hope I'm wrong too.. just don't think so. <shrug>
              The opt-out is a good idea in theory, but honestly, how often has that worked for the average person? My state has a no-call list. Your offline version of a "no thanks". Guess how many calls I recieve from offline spammers a week that I never opted in with to begin with? About one or two a night. And online it's even worse. Clicking "no thanks" or opting out of an email list is usually futile. Your email has already been sold and circulated to a dozen or so marketers/spammers already and even if you opt out of that one offer you've got 10 more coming since you're address is already out there - OR - you've just confirmed your address is live to anyone wishing to spam the hell out you. I wouldn't trust an opt-out option for anything related to my search in a million years.

              And if my homepage is Google or whatever search page, and that's my "portal" to the web, what exactly is my "back button" pointing to again? My desktop? What I'm saying is, if I jump online and am herded off the bat to come out of pocket to do anything, then I'm just not going to get online. Me or a couple other people like me will get together and create the "new" net in the image of the way the web used to be.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1499635].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author theemperor
    I though web 2.0 was about AJAX and having real-time updates and all that. But I also agree that it could be about user generated content, but hey forums have been around for ages. Then maybe it is about web apps like gmail, or mash-ups whatever they are. Or is it twitter? Dunno!

    So web 3.0 whatzat all about? I hope it is 3D, whatever it is.
    Signature
    Learn to code faster, and remove the roadblocks. Get stuff done and shipped! PM me and I can help you with programming tutoring, specialising in Web and the following languages: Javascript ~ HTML ~ CSS ~ React ~ JQuery ~ Typescript ~ NodeJS ~ C#.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1499495].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Steven Wagenheim
      Rod, to be honest with you, I can't even envision web 3.0 simply because
      I'm not so convinced that there's a web 2.0.

      A lot of the stuff they call web 2.0 (interacting with other sites) has been
      around, albeit in primitive form, for a long time.

      Remember the old guestbook code from back in the stone ages that you
      could put on your web page so that people could sign it and leave little
      messages for you and everybody else to read?

      How is that so different from the Squidoo guestbook module?

      I know stuff today is a lot more advanced and a lot simpler, but new?

      I'm not totally sold on the web 2.0 label.

      But 3.0?

      Who the heck knows?

      I certainly don't.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1499511].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author KristiDaniels
    James,

    That describes everything important in life.

    Love
    Democracy
    Truth
    Friendship
    wealth
    Health
    Happiness
    Community
    Utopia

    They are all just concepts. They are words that people started making up definitions for and then trying to come to agreement on what they meant.

    Just words. That's all we've got here.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1499497].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author AMRTrading
    fascinating!!!

    I agree, web 3.0 will look more closely at doing the surfing FOR you. It will be much more interactive and personalised, if you're from the UK, Vodafones 360 technology looks to be going this way, revolutionizing and combining many different methods of contact into one central socializing hub...

    I say roll on, sounds exciting whatever it will be!!!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1499516].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Zach Booker
    As marketers we tend to move at lightening speeds. The general public hasn't even caught on to this thing called "web 2.0". (Which is what? Facebook and Twitter?)

    Asking what web 3.0 will be is basically asking where you see the future of the internet going. I see it evolving more slowly - the more things generally tend to evolve the less money there is to be made in it.

    Argue that all you will but how much are the "social media experts" really making?

    Just like with anything you have power players who's goal it is to gain the maximum profit either for personal reasons or for shareholders. The more people interact the less likely they are to click an ad and buy something.

    The few start up companies like Twitter that could be considered the next big thing have no viable platform in which to make money and their becoming spammed to death.

    Eventually the web will become as it began with all these "interactive sites" - full of spam.

    It's all a cycle.

    Zach
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1499567].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author TheRichJerksNet
      Originally Posted by Zach Booker View Post

      The few start up companies like Twitter that could be considered the next big thing have no viable platform in which to make money and their becoming spammed to death.

      Zach
      Yeah but Zach they sure are doing something right to get those millions in investments ...

      James
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1499613].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Zach Booker
        Originally Posted by TheRichJerksNet View Post

        Yeah but Zach they sure are doing something right to get those millions in investments ...

        James
        True. But how long before those investors ever see a return on that investment? Facebook just saw it's first profit a few months ago.

        There will always be investors who invest in things that are revolutionary - but don't make them any money.

        Twitter will set up an advertising platform. I've heard simply creatives under the trending topics - but will they make as much as they are evaluated at?

        Not even close.

        Zach
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1499665].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author TheRichJerksNet
          Originally Posted by Zach Booker View Post

          True. But how long before those investors ever see a return on that investment? Facebook just saw it's first profit a few months ago.

          There will always be investors who invest in things that are revolutionary - but don't make them any money.

          Twitter will set up an advertising platform. I've heard simply creatives under the trending topics - but will they make as much as they are evaluated at?

          Not even close.

          Zach
          Well I am certainly no investor but I was actaully amazed at how they got the investors .. Yep it is full of spam and they make no money... Maybe investors just wanted a tax write-off, I don't know ... :confused:

          James
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1499702].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Zach Booker
            Originally Posted by TheRichJerksNet View Post

            Well I am certainly no investor but I was actaully amazed at how they got the investors .. Yep it is full of spam and they make no money... Maybe investors just wanted a tax write-off, I don't know ... :confused:

            James
            I think this is just a Canadian commercial. But I love it. These corporate executives are sitting around a table having a heavy talk and one of them takes out one of those origami fortune teller things and asks the person next to him to pick a color and number and once he does lifts up the tab telling him his future and it says, "Diverse core assets by quarter three."

            ...They all look around at each other and start nodding their heads saying that sounds pretty good.

            I have a feeling that many a company simply invested a few million in Twitter because they had cash to burn and it seemed like a good idea without really understanding the history of the internet and how previous innovated companies like Twitter have really done. (Usually not too well.)

            Zach

            Edit: Good post Smokemon.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1499764].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author smokemon
          Originally Posted by Zach Booker View Post

          True. But how long before those investors ever see a return on that investment? Facebook just saw it's first profit a few months ago.

          There will always be investors who invest in things that are revolutionary - but don't make them any money.

          Twitter will set up an advertising platform. I've heard simply creatives under the trending topics - but will they make as much as they are evaluated at?

          Not even close.

          Zach
          I love this because it's so true. Seems we've learned little since the bubble burst last time. I remember face palming when I began to see all these "new" and "innovative" ideas being touted as the NEXT BIG THING from about '95-00, then come crashing down. What those people never realized, and what some that are new to the game still don't, is that the web was not created to make money. Period. It has a tremendous ability to resist even the most strong-armed attempts to be transformed into that old business model. You don't come online and change the web to make you money. You change with it.

          Far as twitter goes, I never saw the appeal. If I wanted to txt message, I'd send a txt message, or I'd get on <insert instant messenger of choice>, or I'd e-mail, or I'd pick up the phone, etc,. It's one of those things that's popular because... its... popular? The Paris Hilton of the online world.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1499704].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author smokemon
            I'm going to go ahead and double post, because it's been quite a few years since I've both participated in a thread AND contributed to going off-topic like I sorta did here. Sorry bout that and before I head off for the night, I wanted to spend about 5-10mins typing up a more direct response to OP since I think the heart of his question is really, "What are the new/hot/emerging things/trends that I'm going to want to be in on?"

            Originally Posted by xiaophil View Post

            Remember there are three kinds of people: those that make things happen, those that watch things happen, and those that wonder what just happened.
            I've always liked that quote. To add to one of my previous posts, I wanted to set out a couple of points people may (or may not!) want to take note of if they're seriously considering being ahead of the curve:

            1.) You ABSOLUTELY, POSITIVELY, HAVE to have in-depth knowledge of a subject (especially its history), to be able to best determine the future of said subject. As it pertains to "Web 3.0", take your consumer & marketing hat off for awhile and forget about what you've been told and sold as to what the web is and/or was. Marketers will tell you what something is b/c they want your money. Consumers will believe what they're told b/c they're in it to spend, not to learn. You want to be neither. You need an independently objective view of the web: where it's been, what it is, and where it's going. I could fill a thread w/ resources on the subject but really Google should be sufficient I think. For those relatively new to the web and looking to "see" what it was like before, I usually direct them to archive.org. It really just scratches the surface but should be enough I think to give an idea of the change that's happened in at least a few key areas, like site design and the techniques used/replaced/forgotten/ and the emerging practices that are still done today.

            Get a good idea of what the web was in say 1995. Really spend some time on the subject for just that year. Then move on to 1996 or whatever year after that. Keep building your understanding of the changes that are occurring year by year. Stop when you get to 2009. File everything away in your head b/c you're going to be calling on what you've learned in just a little bit.

            2.) Define what the web is today. What do we use it for? How do we access it? What's "better?" What's worse? What's made headlines this year? Who are the major players? Who are the movers and shakers? What's going on RIGHT NOW?

            3.) Compare everything you learned about the web prior to now, and what the web is today. What's changed? Who's gone? Who's new? There was real concern at the beginning of the web from major businesses offline as to how, when, or why they were going to have a presence online. How did the web change from then till now to facilitate that growth? How did the web gain such widespread use and popularity in such a relatively short amount of time? Why do you think it happened in the first place? Start to identify the growth and evolution of the web as a sequence of overcoming problems and hurdles in the online world. Example problem: The web was somewhat of a lonely place just 15 years ago. We weren't as readily connected point to point en masse like we are today. So what changed?

            4.) Understand that advances happen for a reason. Look back at 3.) and, if you did all your research right, you should be able to see that this is definitely the case. People wanted sites like Digg, so people GOT sites like Digg, and everything followed along with it. People wanted something like eBay and they GOT it. Twitter, instant messaging, video conferencing, they are all the same. The need or want arose, the solution filled it, and the technologies used on the back-end already existed, were modified, or were created.

            5.) Identify the problems, wants, and needs on the web TODAY. What are the complaints of consumers, users, companies online? What do people want and need for themselves and businesses? How did the web successfully handle things like this in the past? Emulate history. Find some general problems we have today or things in which there is still a lot of room for advancement.

            Content delivery and accessibility is still a pretty big one. Google has done a lot to help change the way individuals find things online and how businesses find individuals as well. If little Suzy wants to learn about a SUPER COOL AMAZING HOT TRENDY TOY THIS YEAR she can easily get online and Google it. If Bob wants to sell little Suzy a SUPER COOL AMAZING HOT TRENDY TOY THIS YEAR he can easily set up shop and wait for her to find him. But sometimes Suzy has to wade thru a million marketers like us to actually find INFORMATION and not a sales pitch, and Bob has to bring maybe hundreds of people like Suzy to his site for a dozen or more sales. Is there a way for both Suzy and Bob to get what they are after? You betcha, and it's gradually changing all the time in a hundred different ways all over the web.

            6.) Make some intelligent, informed guesses about what you think the web is going to be like in 6 months. Do the same for 1 year off. Then 2 years. Make these conservative guesses since change is rarely as fast or radical as most people tend to believe. Begin focusing on creating a site, an app, a service, a method, or whatever YOU believe is going to have a niche or a place in the web down the line. Toss some "Web 3.0" keywords around in the SE's. Create hype. Create buzz. Stay on top of everything current OUTSIDE OF the marketing world. If you've gotten yourself a good grasp of the net up to this point, AND have done a good job of identifying where it's going in the future, AND have placed yourself out there BEFORE it's happened, then you've already set yourself up to make a killing.

            I didn't intend for this to be a guide and I hardly believe it could be considered as one. It's far too broad and extremely lacking in detail given the subject matter. It's how you pick out trends in anything, online or not. What I DO want people to understand though is that the whole Web 2.0 thing is a myth. It's a concept, and it's been flung around as a marketing term (and quite successfully I might add.) There was no Web 1.0. There was no paradigm shift to a Web 2.0. There will be none to a Web 3.0. What there will be is small, incremental changes here and there with a "killer" app or service from time to time. But guess what? Those "killer" ideas simply filled a need or want that was already there, and then marketed themselves well. What is Twitter except txt messaging? That's not Web 2.0, 3.0, 9940323352.0, or anything. That's called smart marketing and we've been doing it forever.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1499746].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author TheRichJerksNet
    @ Zach - LOL ... I like that ...

    @ Smokemon - Excellent post dude ...

    James
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1499927].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Steve Wells
    I ERASED MY COMMENT..........
    Signature
    Need Custom Graphics Work? - Message Me For A Design Quote!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1499952].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author AgencyScripts
    Simple view:

    Web 1.0: Simple sites, very little (if any) interaction with the page

    Web 2.0: Interaction with the page (comments,sharing, social networks)

    Web 3.0: RIA (Rich Internet Application) taking what would be on a desktop
    application (like Word) into an online application where the files they create
    can be accessed with just an internet account.

    To see proof just look at the companies like Google, Yahoo, Microsoft, and Adobe.
    They are all buying up sites like Buzzword, etc etc.

    Other keywords to bare in mind when hearing more about RIA are "cloud", and
    things like Adobe AIR. Silverlight is another.

    Hope that helps.

    (Addition: You gotta remember that the web, as you see it, is powered by technology
    that is growing, and getting better. AJAX was around before the web 2.0 craze, but
    jquery wasn't, neither was most of the JS libraries. It just wasn't as easy to do AJAX
    type stuff back then as it is now.

    So when you hear "web 1.0" or "web 4.0", you gotta think about it has a UPGRADE to
    the overall software which is the web. For example, with cloud hosting, companies
    can do scalablity way better, and thus allows for RIA applications because they
    can handle all those files, and users way better than before)
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1499965].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author DaveMcF
      Web 3.0 will be like Web 2.0, except with revenues and profitability.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1500203].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Rod Cortez
    Thank you everyone for giving your opinions, I found it a fascinating exercise. I'll wait awhile before I start a Web 4.0 thread........lol

    RoD
    Signature
    "Your personal philosophy is the greatest determining factor in how your life works out."
    - Jim Rohn
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1502653].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author KristiDaniels
    John Titor (wikipedia it) claimed that they changed the numbering scheme after Web 3.0.

    The next version was called Web 2015 in his timeline.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1503264].message }}

Trending Topics