digg

Join DiggAbout

The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.

12 Ways to Go from Web 1.0 to Web 2.0

slayerment.com — The Internet is now a part of everyone's life so shouldn't your archaic beast for a site also be? The answer is yes if you enjoy growth.

show profanity settings
expand all
  • fpcyber, on 10/10/2007, -4/+513. Get high on some good ***** which makes 1.0 look like 2.0

    Same damn thing.
  • MasterThief117, on 10/10/2007, -4/+821. Web 1.0
    2. Backspace three times
    3. type 2.0
    4. Web 2.0
    • snlildude87, on 10/10/2007, -9/+6Web 2.01.0

      That doesn't look right. :P
      • snlildude87, on 10/10/2007, -3/+24I'm retarded. Digg me down.
        • Mearn, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4Never! I must digg you up for having the courage to admit your stupidity!
    • supasurg, on 10/10/2007, -0/+35. ???
      6. PROFIT!
    • RockinRoel, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1For Mac users:
      1. Web 1.0
      2. Delete three times
      3. type 2.0
      4. Web 2.0
      It's really weird, the delete.
  • Adrianc333, on 10/10/2007, -5/+20Lol, this guy is a ***** idiot.

    I'm surprised this even got 2 Diggs.
    • sp1keNARF, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4was it parody or was he being serious? this sentance from #3 is very suspect: "Why would somebody want to read your site if it's categorized into specific sections?"
    • xoools, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2At first I thought it was a joke but towards the end it seems like hes actually serious.
      • mynameisrod, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Yeah, it's a wierd article. Half of it reads like a piss-take and the other half is actually sensible advice. I'm glad it's not just me who's confused. Right, I'm off to increase the font size on my website and change the design to make it crappy looking, so people think there's good content there.
  • psevium, on 10/10/2007, -2/+9I thought it'd be serious but it seems they're trying to joke, except they have the same sorta of site that's reminiscent of "web 2.0" that makes them all look like jackasses caught up in a retarded marketing thing.

    /hates the stupid web 2.0 concept
    • tampersanda, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I still can't figure out if they are joking or not...
  • Limezor, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1I remember when Web 2.0 was a rarely used term...but now...
  • PATSCRU, on 10/10/2007, -3/+211) Use lots of gradients and drop shadows.
    2)Write everything in VAG Rounded.
    3) Invite trolls
    4)???????
    5)PROFIT!
  • Limezor, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4"Nobody likes squinting their eyes, and no it doesn't look good."
    "Come to think about it, just get rid of your whole site and download Drupal or Wordpress and start rocking some free theme."
    "After all, people really don't care what your site looks like that much."

    • TheSpook, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Additionally, a properly developed site shouldn't hard-code font sizes anyway so the user/device can decide.
    • RockinRoel, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Yes and no, TheSpook. It's a good thing: the user can decide, but the look of your website always looks different with a different font, it often breaks your entire style. Coded fonts and fixed sizes are needed to keep your website in control, or it'll go wild.

      Oh, and I like small fonts, and "Web 2.0" is rather getting smaller fonts.
  • blumenth, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5Buried as LAME. A well organized site designed specifically to focus user attention on the most important points beats a fad-laden cookie-cutter PoS any day.
    • mishsquish, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Amen to that. Anyone can make an ad for television. But it'll never compare to a professionally engineered one, designed to affect the viewer on a subconcious level.

      Just because you browse websites and make some for your friends doesn't mean you're a web designer and have the right to make fun of a valid technique known as web2.0.
  • Piedramente, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1CORNSPIRACY!!
  • MisterNipples, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1613. Get a server that can handle a moderate amount of traffic
  • jtb4, on 10/10/2007, -1/+16Every time I hear the words Web 2.0 I throw up just a little bit in my mouth.
    • tizz66, on 10/10/2007, -4/+1Web 2.0 Web 2.0 Web 2.0 Web 2.0 Web 2.0 Web 2.0 Web 2.0 Web 2.0 Web 2.0 Web 2.0

      Hey, you're clearing up your own mess!
    • spectre_25gt, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I don't really understand this problem with "Web 2.0". I'm guessing it has to do with the fact that managers pull out these buzzwords but don't know what they're talking about when they use them. In the end, though, it's a classification of goals and ideals much like any of the isms throughout the history of art or philosophy.
  • luxette, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1It's Dugg into oblivion.
  • mossblaser, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1What a lode of bollocks. Kinda ironic that site looks crap and works crap to isn't it? (And no, I don't claim to have a good site. At all. I just don't care - mine is not for people to visit but for me to learn stuff and using some ***** word press crap does not teach me PHP!)
  • altjeringa, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Perfect! I couldn't agree more. The best way to go from Web 1.0 to Web 2.0 is to use a bloated content management system on a crappy server so that when it gets requested it throws errors!! I can't think of anything more Web 2.0.
  • mishsquish, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4Yarn, yarn, yarn. ***** article. Stop playing out web2.0, it's popular for a reason.
  • xroman, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Dugg, Quinton (slayerment) is an amazing designer, and a funny guy.
  • twodayslate, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1mirror?
  • richieforeman, on 10/10/2007, -3/+1Ouch dude, not even duggmirror got it!

    http://www.duggmirror.com/design/12_Ways_to_Go_from_Web_1_0_to_Web_2_0/
  • generalalcazar, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1"Once again, this is not the 80's and we don't care about your hits!"

    I hate to break it to the guy, but there sure wasn't a lot of hit tracking in the 80s. The very first web page ever was published in 1990.
    • RockinRoel, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Before that, there were newsgroups and chatting channels used by hackers using really expensive UNIX computers at universities.

      Internet was so "Web 2.0" back in the 80's, actually.
      The original idea for web pages were to be edited by everyone.
  • TypeEE, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2I really don't care. Might as well call it Web 2008 like microsoft does. If you write your webpage in 2007, you can call your webpage web 2008.
    • chriskeyes, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0What does this has to do with Microsoft? Web 2008 - does that even exist? Seriously. People always have to bring up the negatives with Microsoft don't they?

      It's just Web 2.0.
    • RockinRoel, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I don't think that it's a negative, it's just funny. It's not only Microsoft of course, it's also the FIFA games. Newer names are silly. It's like: "No, years and previous version + 1" is out, let's try something new, like Driv3r. It goes further with movies: I STILL know what you did last summer... hilarity. And "American Wedding" is an awful name.
  • Zal91, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7This isn't the 80's. The Internet is now a part of everyone's life so shouldn't your archaic beast for a site also be? The answer is yes if you enjoy growth. In spirit of how badass Web 2.0 is I have assembled a list of 12 ways to turn your Web 1.0 site into a Web 2.0 site
    1. Replace esomething.com with MYsomething.com

    Your web site is not web 2.0 if it has some lame "e" in front of it. We all know your web site is electronic! Let's make it personal with a friendly "my" :).
    2. Increase 10px font to at least 12-16px font

    Nobody likes squinting their eyes, and no it doesn't look good. Get rid of the small text and replace it with some easy reading text for us productive people.
    3. Change categories to tags

    Why would somebody want to read your site if it's categorized into specific sections? Your content should be dynamically tagged so everyone can keep track of which is more and less important. Get a tag cloud!
    4. Change your news section to a blog

    People want to know what's going on with your company besides just formal news. Write something thats cool, funny, stupid, whatever! 1/2 the battle is keeping the audience entertained.
    5. Change email a friend to RSS subscriptions

    When was the last time you emailed a friend? Have you ever used it? Me neither. Get rid of that worthless feature and get people subscribing to your site via RSS or even...
    6. Change bookmark this to social network this

    With sites like del.icio.us and Digg you should not be having people bookmarking your site only for themselves to see it. Get your site out there in front of everyone with social bookmarking and networking!
    7. Change user account to user profile

    Nobody wants a boring user page with just their username and email (Yes, I'm talking to you Amazon). They want a full blown personal page that tracks their whole life and tells the world about how great they are. Get your users involved!
    8. Change crappy hard-coded HTML to Semantic HTML with CSS

    Your design is cool and all but how do you update it? How do you change it? How does it allow for new content to be added (which is the most important part!)? Get rid of your angst ridden layout and get some semantic HTML styled by CSS in there that is super light and better for everyone - please!
    9. It's visitors not HITS!

    Once again, this is not the 80's and we don't care about your hits! All that matters is the visitors (Yes, short for unique visitors) and the conversions. Get some Google Analytics on there and stop with the hits talk already.
    10. Add comments

    People want to contribute and share. Let them! It's better for your users and for your search engines.
    11. Change esite.com?id=5235&sort=desc&useless=this &one%20more=still%20useless TO.. mysite.com/meaningful-title

    Need I say more?
    12. Change custom built site to open source CMS

    Come to think about it, just get rid of your whole site and download Drupal or Wordpress and start rocking some free theme. After all, people really don't care what your site looks like that much. They would much rather visit to a terrible looking site with compelling content than a beautiful site with pitiful content. Do it right!
    Conclusion

    People don't use the web just as a book anymore. They like to get involved and contribute. Allow your visitors (not hits) to be a part of your site!
  • TruthElixirX, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5This has to be a joke. =/
  • dvirsky, on 10/14/2007, -0/+13if this is a joke - it's not funny. if it's not - I pity the fool.
    • fjf314, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2When I first started reading it, I thought it was a joke. The more I read, the more I became convinced that it wasn't a joke... and that made me sad.
  • roxya, on 10/10/2007, -1/+9This is the biggest load of crap I've read on Digg today.
  • mbthompson, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2What a load of garbage. Web 2.0 is simply a buzz word for people who don't know anything about IT, mostly talking heads like, well I won't mention names but his initials are John C. Dvorak. This is lame, and I hope it gets buried faster than a hooker's black book in Washington D.C.
    • RockinRoel, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1You should watch out, John C. Dvorak is a rather smart man. He does know what's going on. I enjoy his column.
      What's wrong with attempting to define something that really can't be exactly defined? Where does Web 1.0 end and Web 2.0 start? I don't know, but people have a general understanding of what it means, so if anyone says Web 2.0, they know what he's talking about. If someone starts talking about "XHTML, CSS, AJAX, PHP, MySQL, SEO, dynamic content, user input, RSS feed, ..." most people will go like: "Wait... what?", while "Web 2.0" triggers an "Ooh yeah, cyberwob computer *****, not interested, call me when you start talking about sports".
      • melat0nin, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2thing is, most of the things you just listed existed in Web '1.0'
  • theOster, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2i want my geocities and excite!
  • chaloobe360, on 10/10/2007, -1/+02.0? I believe we are in the process of going 3.0 at the moment...

    Go look up "Semantic Web"
    • meatmcguffin, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Tim Beners Lee always said the semantic web was their original intention and the fact that were only just getting there 10 years later is just crazy

      I can't wait until the whole mess is started over with better speeds, better security and a complete lack of myspace
  • Oatmeal, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Is this a joke or are they serious? Either way it barely rises above mediocrity.
  • Amoeba16, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1If this satire or is this guy actually mentally disabled?

    If so, I'd like to make a charitable donation to his cause. You know, to help put a stop to ***** like whatever disease or syndrome or condition that caused him write such a poignantly awful article.

    I call it: DIGGWHORING!
  • nmeu, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0is web 2.0 going to be the Information Super-Highway we've been waiting for since the 80s? ha..
  • peskykids, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Has no one else noticed that the rest of this a$$holes site is spouting religious garbage and this Web 2.0 article is just cheap ass link bait. Shame on anyone who dugg this. The guy even has a post on his blog titles 'Hitting the Digg Homepage is 10% Content, 90% Contacts". This crap cant be buried deep enough, and to make matters worse its number one on the design page!! Why is the design page alway filled with irrelevant rubbish and is pretty much static from day to day.
  • spoulson, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Wait, no one uses Information Superhighway anymore?!
  • danbrotherston, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Geez...its sarcasm guys...learn to read more than just the words...the point is that web 2.0 is little more than a buzz word to get managers interested in a project.
  • zhulien, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1point 2; I bought a hi-res monitor to fit more on it, not to make text bigger thereby making a hi-res monitor effectively the same as a lo-res one.
  • lunchbox170, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Change categories to tags.

    His site had categories on the sidebar??!
  • froinlaven, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I can't tell if this guy is serious or joking. Or whether to be appalled or... appalled.
  • quasarkitten, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Almost looks as bad as the characters in Polar Express. Almost.
  • donkeySays, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0What about Beta?
  • AvengeX, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Buried as LAAAAMMMEEE. *snore*

    I guess he forgot the whole main idea of Web 2.0 which is all about function.
  • thekungfuman, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0This has got to be a joke. Almost every item has a mistake or is pointless.
    Maybe THAT'S what Web 2.0 is. Nonsensical garbage that criticizes other people.

    And does anyone really care what you call visitors to a website? In all my life I don't think I've ever heard someone say "hits" is wrong or old.
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.