What is Digg?Sponsored by Best Buy
Meet Keith: Best Buy Employee and Possible Singing Sensation. view!
www.youtube.com/bestbuy - One employee proves he has the chops and the passion to star in Best Buy’s holiday campaign.
58 Comments
- sid0, on 10/12/2007, -1/+18Where's 2.0 SP1?
- Landonr, on 06/30/2008, -0/+17Hold on a minute.. Wasn't Web 2.0 Web Services, Or something very similar? I'm calling shenanigans!
- NoOneButMe, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10Cant predict 3.0 with 2.0 technology. Hopefully we'll get a better term then '3.0' as well by the time it comes around.
- NX910a, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8When is the Web 3.0 release candidate going to come out?
- Dested, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Will this be released as a patch to the current web, or will we have to do a full upgrade?
- Satanael, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7If Web 1.0 was able to last through the 90s and into the new millennium, I think 2.0 should get about the same mileage.
- omenmedia, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7But buzzwords get old real quick! Management needs something new, something snappier... how about Web X (eXtreme, to the maX) or iWeb?
- Switch22, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Agreed, I think the API and web services aspects he was talking about is just an extension of Web 2.0.
Web 1.0 wasn't considered 2.0 when animated GIFs were implemented. There needs to be a bigger movement amongst the general public, such as web 2.0. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5apt-get install web-3.0.1.2-i386
- randyzaia, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3If the term "Web 3.0" actually catches on I'm stabbing myself repeatedly in the eyeball.
- bioskope, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Web 3.0 = Skynet
Mark my words - meshman, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3"John Markoff stirred up the pot this weekend by launching Web 3.0, even while good ol’ Web 2.0 is still in beta (or alpha)."
Really. HE launched it. A freaking newspaper columnist is dictating web standards. Thanks. What consortium or comittee reviewed the doubtless numerous RFC's that were submitted? There were none. Some self-important jackass holds up an apple, calls it an orange... and everyone applauds! What the hell? Who's going to declare Web 4.0 in April and be the next wannabe Internet hero? And... Web 2.0 still in beta? W-T-F? Does anybody have a freaking clue what they're talking about anymore? - Alexx3k, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Sorry but that was one of the worst articles I've read for a long time.
I'm not a 'web 2.0' hater, on the other hand a supporter. But so many people miss it's true meaning and what it has slowly come to mean to the internet. There never will be a 'web 3.0' because the 'web 2.0' when you strip away all the hype and spin (ajax, style, community power) is just a model for the internet that 'works'. The .com boom was powered by web 1.0 and it just collapsed under it's own flawed system and weight in the 2001 .com bust - it's whole concept and revenue model was fatally flawed. As with any new platform it takes a while to work out it's revenue model. Web 2.0 is about a 'fixed' model of the internet, largely pioneered by google, giving power to the user, and not charging them for it (the VC's of the .com boom would have rather cut their hands off than do that). Unless there is another .com boom and bust (which, provided this model really does work, there won't be) there never will be a web 3.0 ... the concept of 'what defines' web 2.0 will simply continue to evolve and develop as we see the internet become richer, more interactive and secure a realistic long-term business model.
The writer of this article on the other hand seems to thing that by introducing an API, ajax and javascript styles to give the user a richer-experience is worthy of the title 3.0, when in fact, those concepts date back to pre .com boom (take Viaweb for example). - superrcat, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5It's not a Microsoft product, so no Service Packs are required.
- Ryosen, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3If the term "Web 3.0" actually catches on I'm stabbing randyzaia repeatedly in the eyeball.
- omenmedia, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3...and will they still slap "beta" on them? Or maybe even just "alpha"? Ooh, ooh, maybe "gamma"!
- SoCalDissident, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Web 3.0 - Now with 50% cliches than Web 2.0!
- greatblackowl, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Yep...
We'll end up seeing Web 2.0.0.1.5 r1 Beta - omenmedia, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Meanwhile, in a 1,000 meetings across the world... "As we segway into the synergistic bond between Web 2.0 and Web 3.0, we can really consolidate our strategic prioritisation, build our flexible dynamic response, and form a holistic approach to delivering core real-time enterprise services for our stakeholders."
Management applauds!
Someone then asks "What colour will Web 3.0 be?"
Techies weep profusely. - joel2600, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4this migration will be slowwwwww... it's all about advertising
yes, you can offer everything out there on the internet as services, but then if you offer just data connections, you lose your face, you lose your ability to advertise.
this is the sole reason this will not happen - lateralus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2x86 or x64?
- MiddleOfNowhere, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2While all the 2.0/3.0 yadda yadda is getting on my nerves, it is interesting to see that the coming technologies are closer to Ted Nelson’s original (read: 1960ies) vision of a Hypertext system than anything we had so far.
Services that can talk to each other.
Semantics.
Transclusion (or call them mashups if you are *not* an old fart :).
A platform for future micropayment systems where a musician/author/developer can benefit from a million decentralized transactions.
Looks like we have a few interesting years ahead of us. - goettel, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2That's right, you didn't get the web when it took of, so add a version number to it and try to lay claim. Then add another, and another, failing at each stage to grasp anything essential about it.
It's people like that who make me feel secure in the knowledge I'll be buying my drugs and booze with their ignorance way, way into the next decade. - DamnLogins, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2The marketing guys will decide to slide right by Web 3.0 and into Web 7.0 :¬)
- jaiwithani, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2The Web project is getting bloated. Someone should fork it from the Web 2.0 trunk.
- tempusrob, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Sorry, I totally meant to dig you up ...
Such tiny rating buttons... :[ - Sagags, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3but im just getting used to Web 2.0, and I dont even know what it really means!
- aspirinetu, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1i miss web with no numbers :(
- phatvolvo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2is it out of beta yet?
- axiomflash, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2wheres web 6.0?
- ziki, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Aren't they releasing a Web 2.5 soon? Along with Sapphire on Wheels?
- tlehman, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I believe the chose Web 3.0 to get people's attention, they got mine. I think the number scheme is lame.
- scratched, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Instead of plastic looking fonts with reflections and gradients, you'll just have plain ASCII font in pure text format. Logos are for suckers.
Or if "Web 2.0" gets enough mileage, maybe in 3.0 we'll see some creative stuff done using text but with CSS3 elements such as real rounded corners and shadows. - tastethevenom, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1This is inaccurate, bogus, spam. Web 3.0 is not emerging at the moment.
What the writer is trying to pass as "Web 3.0" is nothing revolutionary -- APIs have been around well before Web 2.0, and mashups are just another branch off of 2.0.
If right now you're looking to be the next O'Reilly by defining the next 'version of the Web': don't. You'll look like a fool.
If you're looking for a definition of Web 3.0: wait. Maybe it's the "Semantic Web", maybe it's not. We'll see in 8 years. - superrcat, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The ones with commit rights have too big of an ego to listen to a suggestion like that.
- redwallhp, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Web 2.0 SP? You mean Web 2.0.1 :P.
Web 4.0 is when you get a persistant web access in your brain, right? Check your email while you play video games for free at best buy. - noamsml, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Whoa, whoa, take it slow. It seems like all projects now are jumping major version numbers every time one feature changes. Personally, I think the web should go the way GNOME and the Linux kernel do, and use major version numbers only for a general revamp, using minor versions for simple feature upgrades and bugfixes, and having all stable versions have an even minor version number.
I, for one, welcome Web 2.2 (right now it's still 2.1.45, though). - squegie, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2@mixxoys
I will personally pistol-whip the next person that says shenanigans! - superrcat, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Screw the talk of Web 2.0 and Web 3.0, let's get crap hosted by organizations and government agencies that looks circa 1996 updated to Web 1.0...or at least HTML 4.0.
Example: http://www.nps.gov/renew/forms.htm
Note the animated 256 color GIFs and "Under Construction" graphic. - noamsml, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"Web 1.0 wasn't considered 2.0 when animated GIFs were implemented."
No, that was a regression to 0.9. - djackmanson, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"Meanwhile, in a 1,000 meetings across the world... "As we segway into the synergistic bond between Web 2.0 and Web 3.0, we can really consolidate our strategic prioritisation, build our flexible dynamic response, and form a holistic approach to delivering core real-time enterprise services for our stakeholders."
Help Mummy! The management consultants are going to eat me! And then talk they'll talk about 'interfacing'...wanna go HOME! - Pirate45, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1This whole Web 2.0 and 3.0 crap is almost as band as trying to be the first to label a musical genre.
- threeb, on 04/09/2009, -0/+0Nice work. I have to learn more about API's, I guess.
- leto123, on 02/21/2009, -0/+0http://www.al3zof.com/vv
- Antac, on 01/07/2008, -0/+0You sound like Bill Gates lol
- cypresso, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3who the hell told them they could coin web 3.0
- ngfkjiohodns, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Web 5.5.6.1 beta special limited edition release with collector's keychain available soon!
- Antac, on 01/07/2008, -0/+0I want to agree with you, but every time you put doubt in the future and what people can do with stuff like this, somebody always comes out with some unique working concept that seems to catch on like a wildfire. Stuff like Skype.
Besides people always adapt to this kind of stuff. - k2eric, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0that could really leverage the synergies between web 2.0 and web 3.0
-
Show 51 - 61 of 61 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