Weekly Thought: Why Good Designers Should Stop Saying “Web 2.0″

The concept of Web 2.0 originally had absolutely nothing to do with design. It was simply used to describe the new trends in social participation on the web and the rise of user generated content.

To say a design is ‘Web 2.0′ means nothing. What it is trying to say is that the design reflects that of a number of sites that work on the new model of increased social interaction, but the term itself has nothing to do with gradients, shiny badges, or even standards, accessibility and validation.

I am sick to the back teeth of the misuse (and infact any use whatsoever) of the term. It has ceased to be useful and should be dropped!

I am definitely sick on it. The biggest problem is that people who are looking to have a web site built will throw the word out because they know it’s a buzzword.

I’m sick of it.

The intro to the Wikipedia article on Web 2.0 is helpful:

Web 2.0, a phrase coined by O’Reilly Media in 2004,[1] refers to a perceived second-generation of Web based communities and hosted services — such as social networking sites, wikis and folksonomies — that facilitate collaboration and sharing between users. O’Reilly Media titled a series of conferences around the phrase, and it has since become widely adopted.

Though the term suggests a new version of the Web, it does not refer to an update to World Wide Web technical specifications, but to changes in the ways systems developers have used the web platform. According to Tim O’Reilly, “Web 2.0 is the business revolution in the computer industry caused by the move to the internet as platform, and an attempt to understand the rules for success on that new platform.” [2]

Some technology experts, notably Tim Berners-Lee, have questioned whether one can use the term in a meaningful way, since many of the technology components of “Web 2.0″ have existed since the beginnings of the World Wide Web.[3]

Good, timely article by you! I’m about to write something similar in a forthcoming article on my site (not the same though…but I might make a reference to this post). Web 2.0 is getting over-hyped…and it’s making the web design community take their eyes ‘off the ball’ (I mean: lose focus on their original goals).

I too think that Web 2.0 is about the social/user interaction too.

Taking this point and Ezekiel’s core values listed above gives (what I think is) a good design philosophy. Not a ‘Web 2.0′ philosophy (let’s ditch the buzzword) but a great base for a website. Using these principles will mean that the website and its designer has a head start.

(Apologies for the bad grammar - I’ve been awake for far too long now.) : )

It is possible that there are girls and guys who misunderstood Web 2.0. I am not one of them. I am not irritated by Web 2.0 and, in the same time, I don’t overuse it. I think that Web 2.0 means progress and any progress is progressive - I mean that there’s a constant process of renewal and…

…we [and our work] are part of this constant process of renewal.

Personally, I’m sick of the words “Web 2.0″ in conversation as if it’s the next big saviour for companies. I hear too many people using it without REALLY understanding what it means.

I don’t allow the words to enter my mind as I believe good designers will design “Web 2.0″ as a matter of course because it’s about creating great websites.

Great post - you hit the nail on the head. To me, web 2.0 is nothing really more than a buzzword, and it’s definitely played out.

Ted, I wouldn’t say it’s a problem as such. It’s an irk though to me. A niggle.

But what if you use the ‘buzzword from hell’ for the powers of good? :-)

I like your thinking there, Scott. Good on you.

“Web 2.0″ is simply the result of trying to put current web design trends into words.

Stupid, if this were Digg, dig down.