What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Follow the Dragon Age: Origins development team on Twitter view!
twitter.com/DragonAge - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
74 Comments
- Dumbledore, on 10/12/2007, -8/+68dugg?
- Margoo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+32who needs 2.0 buttons when 3.0 is right around the corner. plus once we get to 4.0 you won't even need buttons
- kingace, on 10/12/2007, -5/+24Then ignore the tutorial...
- CraigJ, on 10/12/2007, -3/+21"Every day tons of sites which has simple, bright and very interesting things, appear in Network"
Very good Engrish! - Monkeyget, on 10/12/2007, -7/+20Here is another short tutorial to make a different style of "web 2.0" buttons : http://www.evogfx.com/showthread.php?t=7985&highlight=button
- scarycomp, on 10/12/2007, -3/+16By then we'll have telepathic spores that tap directly into our brains.
- Sergio965, on 10/12/2007, -3/+13Well, that was short lived....
[Dead]
http://www.duggmirror.com/design/Web_2_0_style_buttons/ - Mabu, on 10/12/2007, -7/+15I'm holding out for Web 3.1 Extreme Gold Special Edition 2008
- rhizome, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9The best thing about these web 2.0 sites is that when I go to their tutorials or link farms and click on the resulting image, when I click "back," thinking it will take me to read the rest of the article, it brings me back to the previous site I was at (here). Surely next on the diggblock will be a list of tutorials on how to avoid creating an ahistorical website.
- kasted, on 10/12/2007, -6/+13is that tutorial a joke?
- tomi, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9If we were pre-2.0, this would just be called your everyday glossy button. Now, it gets the fancy name of being the glorious Web 2.0 button?
If Web 3.0 turns out to be completely minimalistic, with no images or anything shiny, please don't give us a tutorial for Web 3.0 buttons, I can't imagine how hard that tutorial will be. /sarcasm - AcidPhysx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5So funny everyone who thinks they know what Web 2.0 is digs everyone else down.
Web 2.0 is a mismash concept of technology.
It is not a set of standards or protocols.
It is a word thrown around by people in high positions who want to turn to their Web designers and say. "Why don't we have Web 2.0 yet?! I want it downloaded on every PC by tomorrow!"
Whoever coined that term will burn. If anyone can figure out the difference between a Web 2.0 button and every other button ever made for use on the internet is, then please tell me. The only thing I see coming from this is even more bad web design leaving the majority of the world behind simply because they cannot afford/get basic broadband to have 30K JPG buttons that say RSS feed.
wiki Web 2.0 and tell me your thoughts. Now I gotta digg a bunch of people up - kpumuk, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Not his :-) Author is girl from Ukraine
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Yeah, I was thinking the same thing. Apparently English is not his first language:
http://digg.com/users/kpumuk/submitted - agiorlando, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Those are some slick buttons right there, quality tutorial - you don't see many tutorials make it to the front page anymore.
- digitalsin, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8"Nowadays Web 2.0 style becomes more popular. Every day tons of sites which has simple, bright and very interesting things, appear in Network"
WE GET SIGNAL !!
WHAT YOU SAY ?? - iamjaredc, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6OHHH.. you mean OSX buttons?
- cam503, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Well, I thought it was helpful.
- TroubleInMind, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Web 2.0 should mean we are twice as smart as last time. Mostly it means Trebuchet, rounded corners, and javascript.
- kolanos, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Want to blame someone for this glossy button trend?
Here you go: http://www.apple.com - Sammy20, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3you mums a web 2.0 style button.
- tensvb, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4"Web 2.0 style buttons" - this sounds stupid enough to ignore this article, but let's see... a glossy button!? Geez, I was making glossy buttons years before "Web 2.0" hype started.
- Llanowar, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Damn you for starting the glossy button hype!
- mrRB, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Bring back the breadcrumb trail, I say.
- hurfydurfur, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I'm glad Web 2.0 is just about graphics. I was not looking forward to thinking about conversation, user experience, human communications and actually writing code which I would give a version number of 2.0. Phew, just graphics, saves me money on XML, AJAX and web services. Big relief.
cvs tag 2.0 logo.gif
All my gifs have release numbers.
cvs tag aqua logo.c
While my code doesn't like to be called 2.0 but instead use colors. Aqua is usually what I call 2.0 version numbers. Weird. - Neiby, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4"It shames the Digg community that a post that uses the idiotic phrase "Web 2.0" makes it to the front page. Talk about undermining the relevance and credibility of the whole site."
No kidding. I've previously warned the people in my office that anyone seriously using that term in a conversation is going to be slapped hard. - tybris, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2isn't it all just OS X / Apple style?
- Maxpower57, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Web 2.0 is a concept, not a style..
- lintmonkey, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Making Web 2.0 buttons is one of most useful reasons for using the Photoshop.
- crimsoncircle, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1You are all aware that it's quite possible the author is simply using the term 'Web 2.0' because thats what everyone understands it to be. I mean come on, if it really angers you there should be a point where you leave your computer and go outside. At the end of the day, if I asked what web 2.0 was, most of you would give similar answers so it's not a terrible term, it's a pet peeve of the anally retentive.
- Aleksej, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Everyday, tons of new sites that are shiny, but all look the same and are unlikely to get more than a little content, appear on the Internet.
Even if they are really interesting and are going to (or already do) have enough content, they still have titles look the same as many others' (it would be better if they were just strong/em/font-size:, but they have “cool visual effects” that makes one think they are probably original)… oh well…
My point is, “isn't “Web 2.0” just AJAX”? Glossy image-heavy sites have been with us for how many years? 10? 15? - kpumuk, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Looks like site moved to another hosting
- thesimo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1the best tutorial out there
- grtgreengoblin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I think it's a nice tutorial...hope to see more like this
- cg0def, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2what does good graphics design have to do with Web 2.0? This guy has apparently missed the whole point but then again he's not alone...
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Oh! So these nice shiny thingies are called web 2.0
I always believed that web 2.0 is some kind of system of more advanced and interactive web services and Rich Internet applications that use SOAP, AJAX and REST etc. - fquednau, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1YAWN! So 2.0 looks like candy (extensions to osx and xp)...web 3.0 will look like Vista then?
- Xilon, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1These are web 2.0 buttons? I thought they were just glossy buttons that have been the trend for the past 6 years...
- nathanlandis, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3My favorite is a site that looks like it was made 10 years ago telling me how to do Web2.0.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Last time I checked, CSS and DHTML are very much Web 1.0 (or 1.1, perhaps), which is all this story is about.
- ezedze, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0if you use standard input type="button" tags, the appearance of the button is operating system/browser dependent. if you want to maintain consistency in look and feel, you go ahead and craft your own buttons.
so part of the web2.0 paradigm is creating a distinct visual identity. - kristinpa, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0Cool buttons! well done!
- demizu, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0Awesome. Not for me, definitely
- vicdigger, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0If you are really a programmer, you should be able to understand that the correct expression is actually "I couldn't care less", not "I could care less", assuming that you meant that what you spoke of wasn't important for you. So many people just repeat things after others... like parrots -- phonetically.
- omgcthulhu, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0thanks a lot - it works!
- nublue, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I just released a similar article here (no mention of web 2.0 though :)
http://www.nublue.co.uk/blog/css-hover-button/
See what you think - adsthegenius, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Nice tutorial. "Web 2.0" is a term people associate with alot of things. I tend to think AJAX and web sites that are more like online applications. I'm a programmer. I personally could care less what it's called but "web 2.0" is an association my brain understands.
I have friends in useability that consider it as "XHTML strict" everything validates + a sleek and dirt simple user interface. I know graphic design people who think gradients, glass buttons and rounded corners. I also know those that just can't stand the term. I don't exactly understand this as new terms are born in technology and developement almost every day. You would think we'd be used to it by now no matter how hair brained some of them seem. - inlove, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1A rounded rectangle and a 100 years old glass effect? Welcome to the world of Photoshop, the next thing you'll learn is how to draw a straight line!
- lrgabriel, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Web 2.0...booming e-commerce, dynamic pages, customizable web pages...shiny buttons?
-
Show 51 - 75 of 75 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is