Comments on: Web 2.0: What it is, what it is not, what it has become http://blog.geekartist.net/2009/10/23/web-2-0-what-it-is-what-it-is-not-what-it-has-become/ Advice for Website Owners: Directions from a Geek-to-English Translator Wed, 08 Sep 2010 03:44:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: Thomas Listerman http://blog.geekartist.net/2009/10/23/web-2-0-what-it-is-what-it-is-not-what-it-has-become/comment-page-1/#comment-1131 Thomas Listerman Thu, 12 Nov 2009 21:51:29 +0000 http://blog.geekartist.net/?p=379#comment-1131 In order to understand complex things and trends over time, People tend to boil them down into categories. We talk about the 60's, 70's, 80's, we talk about the middle age, although there was nothing "middle" about it as it happened. We talked (and still talk) about the postmodern, although there is nothing "post" about it. The categories tend to get a more permanent definition as they become history and a new term has arrived. It seems like in Web history, Web 2.0 is on its way to become a category of its own, but it is still being defined. It would be narrow-minded to try and limit the definition to technological aspects, because just as the 60's (or the postmodern) was signified by trends in technology, design, social interaction, etc, the Web today also consists of more than technical solutions. And, as one of the main characteristics of Web2.0 is user interaction, it makes perfect sense that the definition of the term is not set yet. In order to understand complex things and trends over time, People tend to boil them down into categories. We talk about the 60′s, 70′s, 80′s, we talk about the middle age, although there was nothing “middle” about it as it happened. We talked (and still talk) about the postmodern, although there is nothing “post” about it.

The categories tend to get a more permanent definition as they become history and a new term has arrived. It seems like in Web history, Web 2.0 is on its way to become a category of its own, but it is still being defined.

It would be narrow-minded to try and limit the definition to technological aspects, because just as the 60′s (or the postmodern) was signified by trends in technology, design, social interaction, etc, the Web today also consists of more than technical solutions. And, as one of the main characteristics of Web2.0 is user interaction, it makes perfect sense that the definition of the term is not set yet.

]]> By: Thomas Listerman http://blog.geekartist.net/2009/10/23/web-2-0-what-it-is-what-it-is-not-what-it-has-become/comment-page-1/#comment-2628 Thomas Listerman Thu, 12 Nov 2009 21:51:00 +0000 http://blog.geekartist.net/?p=379#comment-2628 In order to understand complex things and trends over time, People tend to boil them down into categories. We talk about the 60's, 70's, 80's, we talk about the middle age, although there was nothing "middle" about it as it happened. We talked (and still talk) about the postmodern, although there is nothing "post" about it. The categories tend to get a more permanent definition as they become history and a new term has arrived. It seems like in Web history, Web 2.0 is on its way to become a category of its own, but it is still being defined. It would be narrow-minded to try and limit the definition to technological aspects, because just as the 60's (or the postmodern) was signified by trends in technology, design, social interaction, etc, the Web today also consists of more than technical solutions. And, as one of the main characteristics of Web2.0 is user interaction, it makes perfect sense that the definition of the term is not set yet. In order to understand complex things and trends over time, People tend to boil them down into categories. We talk about the 60′s, 70′s, 80′s, we talk about the middle age, although there was nothing “middle” about it as it happened. We talked (and still talk) about the postmodern, although there is nothing “post” about it.

The categories tend to get a more permanent definition as they become history and a new term has arrived. It seems like in Web history, Web 2.0 is on its way to become a category of its own, but it is still being defined.

It would be narrow-minded to try and limit the definition to technological aspects, because just as the 60′s (or the postmodern) was signified by trends in technology, design, social interaction, etc, the Web today also consists of more than technical solutions. And, as one of the main characteristics of Web2.0 is user interaction, it makes perfect sense that the definition of the term is not set yet.

]]>