Comments on: Web 2.0, 3.0, 4.0… http://fadtastic.net/2007/01/05/web-20-30-40/ thoughts on | comments about | examples of } web design trends. Sat, 06 Sep 2008 06:15:19 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.1.2 By: Robert http://fadtastic.net/2007/01/05/web-20-30-40/#comment-21063 Robert Fri, 05 Jan 2007 16:54:09 +0000 http://fadtastic.net/2007/01/05/web-20-30-40/#comment-21063 Well I've defiantly got Web 6.0 :P Its a load of rubbish, of course the web is going to evolve like everything else, its not all about glossy tabs and drop shadows. It's how the user interacts with the machine. Well I’ve defiantly got Web 6.0 :P

Its a load of rubbish, of course the web is going to evolve like everything else, its not all about glossy tabs and drop shadows. It’s how the user interacts with the machine.

]]> By: Andrew http://fadtastic.net/2007/01/05/web-20-30-40/#comment-21069 Andrew Fri, 05 Jan 2007 17:45:56 +0000 http://fadtastic.net/2007/01/05/web-20-30-40/#comment-21069 I definitely agree that the web 2.0 style is one of the things that comes to mind quickly, albeit swiftly followed for the reasons behind those styles; I have seen a lot of sites called Web 2.0 sites that just don't feel 2.0 because they are aesthetically different. By which I mean they put function over style to the extent that there is no style. Such is the danger of using terms that are defined through general use more than through hard and fast rules. As someone who is keen on the graphical side of things it is difficult to separate the 2.0 experience from the graphical trends that accompany it. I definitely agree that the web 2.0 style is one of the things that comes to mind quickly, albeit swiftly followed for the reasons behind those styles;

I have seen a lot of sites called Web 2.0 sites that just don’t feel 2.0 because they are aesthetically different. By which I mean they put function over style to the extent that there is no style.

Such is the danger of using terms that are defined through general use more than through hard and fast rules. As someone who is keen on the graphical side of things it is difficult to separate the 2.0 experience from the graphical trends that accompany it.

]]> By: Abhijit Nadgouda http://fadtastic.net/2007/01/05/web-20-30-40/#comment-21070 Abhijit Nadgouda Fri, 05 Jan 2007 17:50:20 +0000 http://fadtastic.net/2007/01/05/web-20-30-40/#comment-21070 John Markoff of NY Times already introduced Web 3.0 as the Semantic Web. I hate these version numbers for the Web. Web is changing continuously, these numbers do not serve any cause, other than creating confusion. I had expressed my opinion <a href="http://ifacethoughts.net/2006/11/13/web-30-or-how-to-kill-simplicity/" rel="nofollow">on my blog</a> earlier. The only thing I hope for is that we will get more aware of standards, semantics and topics like usability and accessibility in terms of design. And hopefully we will also leave having eternally beta and gamma and sites. John Markoff of NY Times already introduced Web 3.0 as the Semantic Web. I hate these version numbers for the Web. Web is changing continuously, these numbers do not serve any cause, other than creating confusion. I had expressed my opinion on my blog earlier.

The only thing I hope for is that we will get more aware of standards, semantics and topics like usability and accessibility in terms of design. And hopefully we will also leave having eternally beta and gamma and sites.

]]> By: Justin Kistner http://fadtastic.net/2007/01/05/web-20-30-40/#comment-21561 Justin Kistner Mon, 08 Jan 2007 01:41:09 +0000 http://fadtastic.net/2007/01/05/web-20-30-40/#comment-21561 I don't think there will be a Web 3.0. Web 2.0 was an improvement over Web 1.0. We dropped tables in favor of CSS, for example. I think the next phase will be about extending the functionality of the web, not changing it. I've been referring to it as the emergence of the rich web, which will be a rich media layer built on top of the Web 2.0 infrastructure, ideally offered as progressive enhancement. I don’t think there will be a Web 3.0.

Web 2.0 was an improvement over Web 1.0. We dropped tables in favor of CSS, for example. I think the next phase will be about extending the functionality of the web, not changing it. I’ve been referring to it as the emergence of the rich web, which will be a rich media layer built on top of the Web 2.0 infrastructure, ideally offered as progressive enhancement.

]]> By: Mark http://fadtastic.net/2007/01/05/web-20-30-40/#comment-21731 Mark Mon, 08 Jan 2007 17:41:12 +0000 http://fadtastic.net/2007/01/05/web-20-30-40/#comment-21731 For the longest time I was confusing Web 2.0 with Internet 2.0. When I first saw "Web 2.0 style" I thought, what style is already getting associated with upgraded internet infrastructure and vastly speedier connections? Well, gradually I caught on but since I hate buzzwords, I then told myself that I would prefer not to use the term except to reference it to others. This led me to discover that often it was easier to just use the term "Web 2.0" so I did not have to go into lengthy explanations to define something that people already understood as the popular buzzword that I was hoping to avoid. I am sure the Web x.0 naming convention will carry on for a bit until someone with a big enough voice (like an O'Reilly) decides that this is boring and tries something new, like "Web MX04" or "Web CS2" and then we will all be sufficiently confused! For the longest time I was confusing Web 2.0 with Internet 2.0. When I first saw “Web 2.0 style” I thought, what style is already getting associated with upgraded internet infrastructure and vastly speedier connections? Well, gradually I caught on but since I hate buzzwords, I then told myself that I would prefer not to use the term except to reference it to others. This led me to discover that often it was easier to just use the term “Web 2.0″ so I did not have to go into lengthy explanations to define something that people already understood as the popular buzzword that I was hoping to avoid.

I am sure the Web x.0 naming convention will carry on for a bit until someone with a big enough voice (like an O’Reilly) decides that this is boring and tries something new, like “Web MX04″ or “Web CS2″ and then we will all be sufficiently confused!

]]> By: Kyle Korleski http://fadtastic.net/2007/01/05/web-20-30-40/#comment-21905 Kyle Korleski Tue, 09 Jan 2007 14:07:46 +0000 http://fadtastic.net/2007/01/05/web-20-30-40/#comment-21905 Web 2.0 has gotten way too far out of hand, IMHO. Web 2.0 has gotten way too far out of hand, IMHO.

]]> By: Ros http://fadtastic.net/2007/01/05/web-20-30-40/#comment-21936 Ros Tue, 09 Jan 2007 18:09:04 +0000 http://fadtastic.net/2007/01/05/web-20-30-40/#comment-21936 Well you know the only way people to stop using tables is to burn the tables. With 'burn' i mean, well, just delete them somehow for the browsers. For the 'flash era'- many people still like the heavy animated flash sites that are loading with ages. I think x.0 will make xhtml/css sites like flash sites. Animation in css?! Maybe. Then the x.0 version will burn Flash, like 2.0 is burning 's at the moment! Lets see what will hapen in few years. Well you know the only way people to stop using tables is to burn the tables. With ‘burn’ i mean, well, just delete them somehow for the browsers. For the ‘flash era’- many people still like the heavy animated flash sites that are loading with ages. I think x.0 will make xhtml/css sites like flash sites. Animation in css?! Maybe. Then the x.0 version will burn Flash, like 2.0 is burning ’s at the moment!
Lets see what will hapen in few years.

]]> By: Matt http://fadtastic.net/2007/01/05/web-20-30-40/#comment-22580 Matt Thu, 11 Jan 2007 20:42:31 +0000 http://fadtastic.net/2007/01/05/web-20-30-40/#comment-22580 "Web 2.0" doesn't mean anything in reality. IMO, it stands for the progression of the internet, bringing user interconnectivity, rich media and scalability. I don't think it really should be given a label, rather, it's just the progressive evolution of the internet. “Web 2.0″ doesn’t mean anything in reality. IMO, it stands for the progression of the internet, bringing user interconnectivity, rich media and scalability.
I don’t think it really should be given a label, rather, it’s just the progressive evolution of the internet.

]]> By: Brandon http://fadtastic.net/2007/01/05/web-20-30-40/#comment-25083 Brandon Sun, 21 Jan 2007 13:58:46 +0000 http://fadtastic.net/2007/01/05/web-20-30-40/#comment-25083 Applications in the browser is merely bringing web 2.0 user interactivity to the next level. Web 3.0 if there will be one is probably something only the people at Google can possibly dream up. Like, a WIDE-SPREAD video phone via your cable connection, something bringing things that are outside your computer in for the masses. Applications in the browser is merely bringing web 2.0 user interactivity to the next level. Web 3.0 if there will be one is probably something only the people at Google can possibly dream up. Like, a WIDE-SPREAD video phone via your cable connection, something bringing things that are outside your computer in for the masses.

]]> By: Douglas d'Aquino http://fadtastic.net/2007/01/05/web-20-30-40/#comment-25387 Douglas d'Aquino Tue, 23 Jan 2007 16:07:18 +0000 http://fadtastic.net/2007/01/05/web-20-30-40/#comment-25387 to be honest, web 4.0 was also said for someone out here (I don't remember exactly where...) hehehe but good try I think that you're right. The web 2.0 is a concept... this concept includes visual styling, technical advancement and culture changing. to be honest, web 4.0 was also said for someone out here (I don’t remember exactly where…) hehehe but good try

I think that you’re right. The web 2.0 is a concept… this concept includes visual styling, technical advancement and culture changing.

]]> By: viceroy321 http://fadtastic.net/2007/01/05/web-20-30-40/#comment-32439 viceroy321 Sun, 25 Feb 2007 20:33:19 +0000 http://fadtastic.net/2007/01/05/web-20-30-40/#comment-32439 isn't the web2.0 "style" you describe just the influence of MaxOSX (March 2001) on Webdesign ? plus of course alistapart's persistent calling (since 1998) for cleaner websites & standards ? another bit may be the average age of webdesigners, which is higher than in 1998, changing taste. i believe to predict a 3.0 style is to predict success of a certain product. i see the aesthetic of the cross media bar in recent sony products as a possibility, but don't like it personally. white on black sucks. with the proliferation of content syndication, this will also become somewhat irrelevant, as for example the device displaying the RSS feed can decide how to style it. so the device designers (like the iPhone or the KRZR team) might one day take back the power from todays hegemony of signal designers... isn’t the web2.0 “style” you describe just the influence of MaxOSX (March 2001) on Webdesign ? plus of course alistapart’s persistent calling (since 1998) for cleaner websites & standards ? another bit may be the average age of webdesigners, which is higher than in 1998, changing taste.

i believe to predict a 3.0 style is to predict success of a certain product. i see the aesthetic of the cross media bar in recent sony products as a possibility, but don’t like it personally. white on black sucks.

with the proliferation of content syndication, this will also become somewhat irrelevant, as for example the device displaying the RSS feed can decide how to style it. so the device designers (like the iPhone or the KRZR team) might one day take back the power from todays hegemony of signal designers…

]]> By: David B. http://fadtastic.net/2007/01/05/web-20-30-40/#comment-86293 David B. Tue, 04 Sep 2007 03:10:34 +0000 http://fadtastic.net/2007/01/05/web-20-30-40/#comment-86293 I'll call it more<strong> </strong>next generation than web 3.0 (silly) but i beleive that the next phase of the web will really be more user interaction, i think netvibes has it right and all the early adopters of that form of site, where the user not only interacts with the page but actually forms it also. can you see fadtastic created so i can place/delete/add columns/information where i want them? :) I’ll call it more next generation than web 3.0 (silly) but i beleive that the next phase of the web will really be more user interaction, i think netvibes has it right and all the early adopters of that form of site, where the user not only interacts with the page but actually forms it also. can you see fadtastic created so i can place/delete/add columns/information where i want them? :)

]]>