Main Page

From Webstock

Wiki for the [Webstock] Web 2.0 debate.

Contents 1 Web 2.0 debate 1.1 Philip's Notes 1.2 Brenda's Notes 1.3 Some questions

Web 2.0 debate

Our position is to argue against the statement: "Web 2.0 is all fizz and no substance"

Philip's Notes

Philip's notes

Brenda's Notes

• the body of web 2.0-ish content is substantive in itself
• numbers of blogs
• wikis
• This guy has an interesting take on twitter - that essentially it helps middle-aged men connect with each other and be part of the world ... odd that! http://www.kn.com.au/networks/2007/05/twittering.html
• http://www.slideshare.net/thomaid/web-20-and-you - backgrounder
• This is pretty substantial - real people getting together courtesy of "web2.0 communications toolkit" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BarCamp

Some questions

• (brian@silverstripe.com) Does "no substance" in the debate question translate to "nothing that will displace desktop applications?" I'd be really curious to find out what the "no substance" part means. Because as Brenda said in her notes, the quantity of 2.0 stuff happening is substantial.
• (brian@silverstripe.com) Google Gears is their version of Firefox 3.0's local content. Both Google and Firefox have a vision for disconnected and semi-connected user experiences. Is this part of Web 2.0? I think it is. And it shows how the web is evolving into something far beyond what Tim Berners-Lee imagined just 13 years ago.