All in Web 2.0

On Attempting an Updated Definition of "Web 2.0"

I recently had an opportunity to provide an updated definition of “web 2.0” for a project I’m consulting on. The project, managed by the National Academy of Engineering (NAE), is called Changing the Conversation: From Research to Action. “Web 2.0” is one of those terms that just won’t die. Even as some have tried to invent and sell newer-sounding terms like “web 3.0,” there are still many for whom the underlying concepts of “web 2.0” and social media are new, unfamiliar, or ready to be revisited after an initial or limited exposure.
I’m optimistic. I’m beginning to think that second-nature use of collaborative technologies by non-technologists, both for social engagement as well as for work, could reach a tipping point much sooner than I had thought. It’s not going to be completely smooth sailing, though.
In September 2006 I published The Justification of Enterprise Web 2.0 Project Expenditures. It examined differences between the cost justification of current information systems compared with cost justification of older systems. It discussed how some of the rules for calculating and thinking about technology related costs have changed.
The report Six Practical Steps to Improve Contracting by Dr. Allan V. Burman, Adjunct Professor, George Mason University, is based on a series of discussions co-sponsored by The IBM Center for the Business of Government and George Mason University concerning government procurement practices.
“Web 2.0 Is Dead” posts are a dime a dozen. It’s a pleasure to read one with real content. Andrew Chen’s Which startup’s collapse will end the Web 2.0 era? warns that business models that don’t include secure revenue streams are hazardous to corporate health. At minimum, if you have valuable content parked in the cloud on a network you use for free, consider yourself warned, especially in these perilous economic times.