KuraFire Network

Friday, November 11th, 2005. At 10 am sharp, Richard Rutter officially opened the d.Construct 2005 conference, and Andy Budd took the floor for the introductionary session: What is Web 2.0? A report by yours truly.

Andy kicked it off by taking us on a tour through the past, explaining how Tim O'Reilly and Dale Dougherty invented the term Web 2.0 quite some time ago already. The reason for it was the increase in applications that were of a definite "new" type. There were web services that truly differed from the ones we had, so they sat down and started making a list of aspects between old and new school web applications. This is the definition of Web 2.0 as it is, today:

• Open data formats; user created content can be taken out of the service easily if desired
• No data lock-in or walled gardens, or as Andy eloquently sampled: "Not like a shop that you walk in and they don't let you leave until you buy something"
• User created data; offer a service and let the users create your primary content
• User owns their own data
• Ability to use data outside the confines of the application
• Data used across devices

One of the key traits that one would find in a Web 2.0 app is that it is a pleasure to use. There should be enjoyable interaction while the functionality is being used in an efficient and more effective [than before] manner. Continuing, Andy points out that it all really kicked off with Google Maps, among a few others, but Google Maps primarily. This is backed by the fact that it has spawned many other Web 2.0 apps that make use of its open API.

Andy listed a selection of web applications that are key examples of Web 2.0 at work:

• OnOneMap.com; Google Maps + external data (houses)
• Netvibes.com; a custom start page that you can change to suit your needs perfectly
• Backpack/Basecamp; "a wiki on speed"
• Meebo.com; an online IM client (covers 4 biggest: AOL, MSN, Y!, Jabber/Google Talk)
• Writely.com; word on the web (see also: JotLive.com, Dojo rich text, WriteBoard) + collaboration + versioning

But where's the revolution?

Andy explains that he, among others, are often asked what the big deal about Web 2.0 is. "I've been doing this stuff for years" is one of the things people will say in regards to AJAX, for instance. Andy, however, disagrees that there is no real revolution. He admits that, maybe, it's not a revolution, but just evolution of the web.

The Web of today is more mature, argues Andy. The web economy has gotten back on its feet entirely, people are investing in starters again, the market is more mature in how it deals with commercial enterprises on the web, and that is what makes this different. Web 2.0 fits into that, it identifies the change, just like a good buzzword should. Because yes, Web 2.0 is a buzzword, let's not deny that! But buzzwords have their uses, something you'll have to acknowledge even when you're not fond of them.

To counter the "lack of revolution"-argument, however, Andy gives us the example of the steam engine: The steam engine was first invented in Greece in the 1st Century AD, but it was used as a toy. It wasn't until 18th century England that it was used to power machinery.

This example shows perfectly how certain technologies may have been in existance for a long time, but haven't been used "properly" until "recently". AJAX is, obviously, the closest match for that analysis. Doing AJAX-like stuff in websites has been possible for at least 8-9 years, but a) very few people actually knew how to do it, and b) even less people managed to do it easily. AJAX has made it easy, and the AJAX buzzword has made it easy to communicate to others. That's (a part of) Web 2.0.

What excites Andy is how it has become a very fun time to be a web developer. New technologies, new and innovative uses of existing technologies, and just really, really cool stuff that is being made all over the web. We're only just touching on the surface of this immense potential that is the Web as a service and application platform, rather than a document sharing platform. But we're touching it, and we're going in.

There is a word of warning, though. We must not fall into the "Web 2.0 trap" and make the same mistakes as the people did in 2000. Already are we seeing people throwing out hard work of the last few years for the sake of interactivity. Think AJAX applications that don't degrade gracefully for one bit. People are going overboard, and there lie many dangers in that.

Another such issue is that developers think that every problem has a technical solution, but Andy stresses that it's completely untrue: fundamentally not every problem has a technical solution.

Web 2.0 is exciting, but we shouldn't create solutions for non-existant problems. Just because AJAX is cool stuff, doesn't mean you should create an AJAX-powered application. People are jumping the bandwagon without knowing if there's a market for their product(s), and we must be careful with that.

Just another bubble?

This relates to the revolution-question, and again, Andy believes that this is not just another bubble. Subscription business models are a reality nowadays, online advertising is very viable, and people have learnt from the mistakes of 2000. On top of that, it's proven that Web 2.0 offers real and tangible benefits, in terms of usability, user experience, quality and profit.

There is a lot of hype going on around Web 2.0 and its various facets, but, as Andy exclaimed, forget the hype, build cool stuff with it! This "new" Web simplifies distribution, it provides an easy way of maintaining code, it is faster to bring to market as there is no need for a distribution channel, so make use of it and reap the benefits.

Questions

The first question was where microformats fit into the whole Web 2.0 scheme of things. As far as Andy is concerned, microformats are a great thing, a brilliant principle even (I do believe he said Tantek is a genius), but they don't really fit the Web 2.0 description.

A great question was asked next: how do we get around corporate resistance to Web 2.0?

One thing that I feel we should all keep in mind that this may simply not be possible in some cases. However, there are ways to work around corporate resistance. For one, you can opt not to tell them that it's Web 2.0. It is our state of mine, of the developers of the applications and sites, and not the state of mind of the executives.

In the SubEthaEdit collaborative writing, one of the authors jotted down a reference in regards to this: 'Advocating the Quiet Revolution' on Stuff and Nonsense.

Another issue that was raised was whether we should trust third parties with our data. As far as Andy is concerned, yes, trust is a big deal, and to an extent we should trust these new services with our data. I will put my pictures on Flickr but I won't enter my bank details on "NewStartup.com". Basically, just use common sense: trust bigger players more than smaller, newer ones, and don't invest critical or very privacy-sensitive data into startups (or even larger ones, in some cases).

The question of Should AJAX-y applications still gracefully degrade? was met with a very stern "YES!", and I believe that most of the audience will have agreed with Andy and his stern-ness. Graceful degredation is one of those things we should really not forget about, especially not when we start building the cool new Web 2.0-applications with all their AJAX-y goodness. Things should simply always work even when JavaScript is turned off.

At the end, one person inquired how to sell Web 2.0 / AJAX to clients rather than managers. A list of selling points will be handy for this, and while there may well be more, this is a pretty good start for any such situation:

• Interactivity is very important, as it makes the user experience more pleasurable;
• Better user experiences mean users will want to use the service more regularly;
• People react better to well-designed sites
• Avoid chucking bits of AJAX in just because it's cool; use it for useful stuff.

That concluded Andy's session on What is Web 2.0? and it was a good preparation for the rest of the day. For a more detailed read on what Web 2.0 is, please see What is Web 2.0? on the O'Reilly Network.

Notes and presentation slide contents can be found for all sessions of the d.Construct 2005 conference in my Liveblog post.

Bookmark: Newsvine del.icio.us Digg