I was forwarded this link by @surfsofa:”Chief executives still don’t get the web“.
A recent Heidrick & Struggles poll found that 56pc of senior business people had never logged onto Facebook. Clearly there’s a generation gap issue, as most CEOs are in their 40s or older. CEOs who got burnt in the financial fallout of the dotcom bubble in 2001, or over-invested in preparing for the damp squib that the Y2K computer bug turned out to be, typically have deep reservations about investments in technology
This isn’t surprising, really. If you’ve been burned or lost a lot of money you’re going to be sceptical and it’s going to take a while before you can seriously consider that sector again. It’s also not surprising that the older generation has not logged into FaceBook (or even LinkedIn) because they may need convinced of the value. I’ve seen the value of LinkedIn this week with replies from some major media companies that would have been almost impossible to find elsewhere. Likewise with Facebook – it tells you not only what a person presents but also a lot more qualities about someone, for example, whether you’re more or less likely to get on and, frankly, whether they spend a lot of time fighting werewolves and zombies online.
We’ve heard of the effects of Facebook in hiring: make sure your profile says the truth about you, you never know who is looking.
Visionary business leaders hope that Wave Three will include businesses waking up to and fully embracing the true potential of the internet. Narayana Murthy, CEO of Indian IT services group Infosys, states: “Web 2.0 has been focused on social communities, on individual relationships; things not focused on the office. I would like Web 3.0 to be about more interaction between customers and vendors and competitors, on making life better for the customer.
*deep sigh*
I’m sorry, Narayana, Web 2.0 is already about interaction between customers and vendors and competitors, it’s already about conversations, it’s already about improving the experience of individuals online. When someone trots out “Web 2.0”, I think that they may be telling me something about some new social / interactive / conversational / user-generated internet phenomenon. Web 2.0 is simply a way of saying “Not Web 1.0”, “Not static pages”, “Not one way communication”.
In contrast, when someone trots out “Web 3.0”, I think they’re an idiot.
I think I will wait until 2.2 beta comes out before exposing myself to this madness!
Seriously though, totally agree – Web 2.0 should only be used to distinguish websites that focus on interaction and dynamic content from those that don’t. It shouldn’t be used to define the current state of the internet.
>>>the older generation has not logged into FaceBook (or even LinkedIn)
Well, you know, it’s could be due to the fact they’re busy making all that money you’d like them to invest in *you* as venture capital.
Plus, geez, what person has the frikkin time to pore through all the crap from social walled gardens? I gave up on MySpace months ago and dread signing back in to tell everyone I’m no longer there much (if at all).
Web 2.0 is a buzzword already. It’s not real. I only use it to describe sites that encourage communication, usually using AJAX, but many other people have subverted it for their pet project. It has now pretty much degenerated to mere marketingdroid speak, and as such will be replaced by Web 4.0, much like MPEG 4 followed on after MPEG 2.
The original definition of Web 2.0, by Tim O’Reilly is “Web 2.0 is the business revolution in the computer industry caused by the move to the Internet as a platform, and an attempt to understand the rules for success on that new platform.”
Internet as a platform. Yeah, ok. That’ll do. Hmm …
Hi Toby – I think we’re in agreement!
Mike – I’m almost in that generation!
Jared – yeah, Web2.0 is a meme, nothing more
Hi Matt,
Just dropping a note to say that ‘web 3.0’ has a somewhat vaguely formed definition over in the data portability camp, where it tends to refer to an Internet with an emphasis on exporting raw data rather than visual design.
And that’s very much a definition I’d like to see take hold. 🙂 The world would be a much better place..
David.
OK, I’ll accept that. Data portability should have been with us all along. Too many walled gardens already 🙂
Data Portability should be like …. TCP/IP. A basic need.
I think the best of Web 2.0 is still to come with the advent of more powerful mobile devices and clouds.