Archiv
Von Web 1.0 zu Web 2.0
„Web 1.0, so Tentlers plakative Beschreibung, ist eine Einbahnstrasse. Dinge werden publiziert, ohne dass eine Rückmeldung möglich ist. Dieser Web-Vergangenheit stellt er den multimedialen, vernetzten Kommunikationraum mit partizipierenden Nutzern von Web 2.0 gegenüber. […] Doch was unterscheidet nun eine traditionelle Webseite von einem Blog oder einem Twitter-Account. Für Tentler spiegelt der RSS-Feed den Mechanismus des Kommunikationssystems am besten wider: Nicht die einzelnen Beiträge sind in diesem System entscheidend, sondern der Fluss der Beiträge vom Produzenten über die CMS-Systeme der Blogs zu den Abonnenten der Blog-Feeds bis hin zur Weiterempfehlungen von Beiträgen und Übertragung der Infos in weitere Netzwerke. Die erwähnten RSS-Feeds sind in der Lage, Neueinträge in Blogs oder Audio/Video-Logs zu sammeln und als News-Abonnement zur Verfügung zu stellen. Über sogenannte Feed-Reader im Mail Programm oder über Feed-Reader wie den von Google werden diese individuell zusammengestellten RSS-Abos in einer Übersicht (Titel und Kurztext) dargestellt. Hier sehe ich also immer gleich, wenn einer meiner Lieblingsblogs einen neuen Eintrag freischaltet. Mit Applikationen wie RSS-Graffiti können ausserdem Kurzfassungen der eigenen Blogbeiträge für die Facebook abonniert und so automatisch eingespeist werden. Nicht vom solchen Strömen profitieren können Leser von traditionelle Webseiten.“
Quelle: http://blog.hslu.ch/audienceplus/2010/04/29/workshop-2-marketing-und-zielgruppen/
Zugriff: 25.08.2010
Begriff – What is Web 2.0
„In short, Tim O’Reilly […] states, „Web 2.0 is the business revolution in the computer industry caused by the move to the internet as platform, and an attempt to understand the rules for success on that new platform.“ It is ment to refere to the second generation of the Internet and is composed of seven core principles.
- The web as platform
- Harnessing collective intelligence
- Data as the next Intel Inside
- End of the software release cycle
- Lightweight programming models
- Software above the level of a single device
- Rich user experience
[…] Web 2.0 is a technology concept, unlike social networking (which is a sociology concept). Web 2.0 refers to a style or method for combining existing technologies to empower people. […] The idea is to make the usage of software applications and Web sites faster, easier and mor intuitive for users. This is accomplished through three general thrusts. First, Web 2.0 leverages the power of end user’s computers to improve the responsiveness of the user interface (U1) of web applications. […]. Second, by separating the content from the U1 design, users can focus on the publishing and exchange of information without having to know the U1 programming required to publish the information. Third, by improving the U1 to be more dynamic and responsive, users‘ attention is drawn to the application and their experience is greatly improved. […]
By using the 2.0 nomenclature associated with software product releases, one might think that Web 2.0 is ment to replace Web 1.0 or is the next version of the Web. This could not be further from the truth. […]. The Web continues to change on a regular basis as a result of new ways for combining technologies and concepts, not in a disjointed, iterative manner, but in a smooth evolution.
In reality Web 2.0 is really nothing new. It is simply a way of recombining and repackaging existing technologies that have been around for quite some time.“
Quelle: Burkhardt, Peter (2009): Social Software Trends in Business: Introduction. In: Deans, P. Candace (Hrsg.), Social Software and Web 2.0 Technology Trends. New York, Information Science Reference: 4-6.
What Is Web 2.0 – O’Reilly Media
„[…] The concept of „Web 2.0“ began with a conference brainstorming session between O’Reilly and MediaLive International. Dale Dougherty, web pioneer and O’Reilly VP, noted that far from having „crashed“, the web was more important than ever, with exciting new applications and sites popping up with surprising regularity. What’s more, the companies that had survived the collapse seemed to have some things in common. Could it be that the dot-com collapse marked some kind of turning point for the web, such that a call to action such as „Web 2.0“ might make sense? We agreed that it did, and so the Web 2.0 Conference was born.
In the year and a half since, the term „Web 2.0“ has clearly taken hold, with more than 9.5 million citations in Google. But there’s still a huge amount of disagreement about just what Web 2.0 means, with some people decrying it as a meaningless marketing buzzword, and others accepting it as the new conventional wisdom.
In our initial brainstorming, we formulated our sense of Web 2.0 by example:
| Web 1.0 | Web 2.0 | |
|---|---|---|
| DoubleClick | –> | Google AdSense |
| Ofoto | –> | Flickr |
| Akamai | –> | BitTorrent |
| mp3.com | –> | Napster |
| Britannica Online | –> | Wikipedia |
| personal websites | –> | blogging |
| evite | –> | upcoming.org and EVDB |
| domain name speculation | –> | search engine optimization |
| page views | –> | cost per click |
| screen scraping | –> | web services |
| publishing | –> | participation |
| content management systems | –> | wikis |
| directories (taxonomy) | –> | tagging („folksonomy“) |
| stickiness | –> | syndication |
Web 2.0 – der Uploader
„[…] Quantensprung vom passiven Betrachter und Leser hin zum aktiv teilnehmenden, sozial engagierten und gemeinschaftlichen Uploader getan – die persönlich zum Web beitragen.“
Interessant: Der User aus dem Web 1.0 wird zum Uploader im Web 2.0 …
Shuen, Amy (2008): Die Web 2.0 Strategie. Innovative Geschäftsmodelle im Internet. Köln, O’Reilly: 1.
pgart
Museen und das Web 2.0 