Zeldman adds his own whining to the chorus complaining about the use of the term Web 2.0. Instead of complaining (most of which comes out of the speakers’ fear that they are themselves becoming obsolete and/or the chastened recognition that they are no longer at the top of the A-List) they should be embracing. Why? Because Web 2.0 is everything and nothing all at once. Materially it is basically nothing: a melange of technologies, most not that new. But conceptually it is everything: a rethinking of the way we view web applications and data management, a re-vision of how we approach the user interface.
To see someone who isn’t afraid of recognizing changes and who doesn’t seem as worried about his own slipping position as Zeldman, take a look at the productive take of Jeff Veen. That’s what Web 2.0 should be about. Shut yer mouth and do something to respond to the users’ needs being represented.
It’s called progress and progress often demands a change in the language, most often (as in this case) to provide a convenient shorthand for referring to a complex collection of ideas and technologies. Remember the furor over the word blog? “Blogs are nothing new, blogs are just publishing, blogs are just writing!” they cried. But the fact was (and is) the idea of the blog and blogging refers to a complex collection of ideas and technologies centered around writing, publishing, gatekeeping, citizen journalism, collaboration, syndication, etc. Imagine if we had to use that list every time we wanted to talk about it? In the end, the term blog and the idea of blogging will outlive its usefulness. In some ways it already has. That’s good. That’s the way language works. Something newly recognized emerges and people need a way to talk about it.
That’s what Web 2.0 is. A shorthand. It represents something good– a good change in the way web apps work, a good refocusing on user’s needs for functionality and data transparency, a welcome turn of attention back to making a better web UI. Like all such terms, it will mean different things to different people at times, and venture capitalists will create a bubble around it… but what’s the harm for all that good. Zeldman and others can complain, but in the end we all benefit by being able to have a pretty good idea what is being talked about when someone talks about a Web 2.0 application.
Total agreement! If Zeldman wants to bitch about the kind of clueless poser who latches onto every new buzzword and blathers on about it incessantly, without really understanding it, then more power to him. That type of person annoys the hell out of me too. But please blame the messenger, not the message.
“Blog” is a good example of why, as is “long tail”. After the term was popularized by Chris Anderson, there was a palpable backlash as everyone and his brother used and abused the term. Now that the dust has settled, it’s become useful again, proof that we would have done ourselves a disservice in discarding it just because it was overhyped for a certain period of time.
Hello and congratulations, I really like your blog. In fact, my wife and I are running a new project about change management software and I found your site while searching for information in this field. Your writing skills are good and we think that you would be perfect to work with us. If you are interested, you can contact us by email. Keep up your work, it’s excellent!
Leave a Reply