My reply to an email questioning web 2.0
Web 2.0 is not a software upgrade on the entire web,but a linguistic term refereing to move towards empowering the “average user”.
Web 1.0 can be generalised as ‘top down’, where a reletively small number of compnies and geeks created content which is read by the masses. A bit like your library analaogy.
Web 2.0 can be generalised as ‘bottom up’ where the masses have the power to create content (youtube, wikipedia, flickr), recomend content (Del.icious, digg, last fm, amazon) share thoughts (twitter, blogs) and be part of an interactive communitee (Facebook, myspace, second life)
I suppose it is more like a library where anyone can go in, add their own books/pages, rate which books are good or bad, and talk discuss their findings.
If you compare the sites you use today with those you used in the early days of the web, is there a difference in who creates, rates, edits, and discusses the content?
Here are a few quotes comparing web 0.1 and web 2.0
Web 1.0 was about reading, Web 2.0 is about writing
Web 1.0 was about companies, Web 2.0 is about communities
Web 1.0 was about taxonomy, Web 2.0 is about tags
Web 1.0 was about owning, Web 2.0 is about sharing
Web 1.0 was about lectures, Web 2.0 is about conversation
Web 1.0 was about advertising, Web 2.0 is about word of mouth
Web 1.0 was about services sold over the web, Web 2.0 is about web services