Wow. Just… WOW.
This isn’t really my area of expertise, and I do like to poke fun – but I can’t do it as well as Mr Adams:
Do these terms mean anything to anyone?
Web 3.0 an official definition?
Filed under Uncategorized
Wow. Just… WOW.
This isn’t really my area of expertise, and I do like to poke fun – but I can’t do it as well as Mr Adams:
Do these terms mean anything to anyone?
Filed under Uncategorized
Web 2.0 is a funny thing — a label for using old technologies together with a specific “style”, I suppose.
AJAX, a coined term for Asynchronous JavaScript and XML. All individual technologies (XMLHttpRequest — 2000, JavaScript — 1995, XML — 1996) are at a minimum 7 years old — and AJAX is somehow very Web 2.0.
To me, it’s a marketing buzzword, though it is something very real for non-technical types. So, perhaps that’s a great thing. It lends credibility to how useful these old technologies are especially when they play together.
Though Calcanis did play the game.
@Cory
Although AJAX is a mash-up of existing technologies, it doesn’t mean it’s not revolutionary. After all, the car was just a mash-up of crap Ford found in his yard, right?
DHTML could offer a rich user interface but had no ability to interact with data not already present in the web page
The HTTP post-back could get data from the client to the server and back, but couldn’t provide any kind of rich interface.
AJAX was the missing piece in combining the two and made it possible for web applications to become rich business tools which can be deployed thinly.
But, yeah, Web 3.0 is shit and is really just a marketing ploy.
Read more:
Why AJAX is the Future of Web Applications
Web 2.0 Best Practices
Agreed. Usually something revolutionary comes from someone linking two seemingly unrelated things — although the synchronous web was always a limitation. Along came the the XMLHttpRequest object in JS and viola, we’ve got a lot of good stuff going on.
Richer interfaces became possible with well-structured and semantic documents and not tied up in browser plugins.
The most amazing and beautiful thing I’m finding nowadays is how old ideas are new and useful again. REST is nothing more than relying on the HTTP stack and applying verbs to nouns. We’ve invented a whole lot of additional layers and abstractions to manage something that’s already there.
Don’t get me wrong, there are challenges and limitations to the web as we know it, even with REST. Nonexistent PUT and DELETE implementations across browsers and web servers require us to fake it.
But in the end, it is a platform on a a platform.
OSI w/HTTP -> ??? -> Profit!
People keep dreaming up ideas for the one we haven’t quite figured out yet (Flex and Silverlight anyone?). AJAX took off because it was a natural next step. It played well with others.
That’s my take. Play well with others and you’ll do all right.
Web 2.0 is like when everyone used to call McDonald’s MickyD’s but once they adopted the nickname it became lame.
Marketing — take something buzzy and officialize it to ruin.
I giggle when certain CEOs use it, though. =)
@Cory
Absolutely. Speaking of playing well, when is the memo going out to Apple to either make Safari a Firefox clone or stop putting out a shit browser?
Oh, and send the same memo to Microsoft.
I sent the memo this morning. Jobsie replied from his iPhone:
“Can’t comment. See you at Cirque du Soleil’s Love show in Vegas. Steve”
B-Dawg said said are writing a web browser for web browsers. Having a web-based browser will help Microsoft keep in sync with the fast paced W3C recommendations. Expect to see Internet Explorer Live in late 2009.
Total crapshoot.
Pingback: Frank & Michelle’s Blog » Flash & Javascript