teach.beaustin.com

Since my last post I've attempted to introduce this concept to a number of people. I've found that it doesn't lend itself to a quick and concise description. Maybe that is simply a function of a relatively complex concept. Maybe the difficulty is in how I'm trying to articulate it.

Let me begin by acknowledging what I think is the seminal article on this topic - Tim O'Reilly's account of the origin of the term and the initial characteristics that were identified. His account is very in-depth and a worthwhile read. O'Reilly's description includes comparisons between Web 1.0 and 2.0 through example sites (Britannica Online vs. Wikipedia) and through characteristics (e.g., static vs. dynamic; centralized vs. distributed control).

One thing I have learned from trying to explain it to a number of people is that if I can hit on a site that they are already using, it is much easier for them to grasp the concept. My explanations were often referring to sites such as Digg and Newsvine - which still have a fairly limited userbase (not in terms of numbers but in terms of focus - techies).

One site that I generally revert to now when trying to describe this to a younger group is MySpace. Although, I've never used MySpace, from what I'm told it very clearly demonstrates some of the fundamental Web 2.0 principles. It has a large user base and depends greatly on social interactions (e.g., you can add other users to your 'friends' list). The site also uses some more advanced media technologies. Users can easily add pictures and music to their page.

While Myspace might conjure up positive images for one generation, another is quite fearful and concerned about MySpace. That topic is worthy of another post at another time. So, for anyone who might be leary of Myspace, I can always revert to Google. Everyone is familiar with Google and in many way's it typifies the Web 2.0 concept. While on the surface, Google doesn't appear to be any different from Web 1.0 sites, a little digging will demonstrate otherwise. Google produces amazing search results. Much better than their predecessors. These superior results are largely the product of one simple but ingenious strategy. Traditionally, search engines catalogued sites by the content found on the page. While Google still uses that information, they place a much greater emphasis upon what other sites say about the page in the form of links back. For example, if I place a link to O'Reilly's article mentioned earlier with the title Web 2.0 - Google will include that page in a search of Web 2.0. Check it out for yourself. Search Google for Web 2.0 and O'Reilly's article will appear very high in the results. Now, that isn't because I linked to it but the fact that many people have included the same link in their sites.

This massive introduction of user votes makes Google the King of search engines and the epitome of Web 2.o.