[Baz]

When does Web 3.0 come out?

This could be interesting.

[Herr Kurm]

there is no such thing as web 2.0 or web 3.0

[bgw]

Late Summer, 2007.

It will involve eggs.

[RaelRode]

Nex week. Google are launching Google Porn that is Web 3.0.

[Dusteh]

Proogle?

[RaelRode]

Ha. GoogleX!!!

Yay me 300th post!!!

[D856C]

Web 3.0 is already released -- read about it here and 3.0 adds the final element missing from web development so far.

[mattlinder]

maybe pr0nggle?

[sinthux]

enough said! It's refreshing and has such a new concept

[forbes]

i couldnt give a fuck to be honest

[keonne]

web 3.0?

we're on web 3.5 alpha dummy

[combat sheep]

somebody delete this post

[extensiblecasca]

Web Googolplex - oh it's coming.

[Alexanda]

i'm waiting till web 4.0 myself before i upgrade

[canadasitecente]

lets they just tack about the rules of web 2

[luou]

GoogleX!!! ASPX!!!
OH MY GOD

[jamied]

As much as I hate the whole web 2.0 bullshit, I've found myself wondering if I should be using the term as this is what so many clients have heard about and latched on to. It's become a very popular buzz word even making as main stream as car commercials, e.g. nissan shift_2.0.

As much as people hate it I think we will all have to start embracing the term. Even though the "web" does not have versions the term does mark a significant change in the way web applications are built, designed and used.

[microdesign]

great fun..
web2.0 isent bullshit. and it does exists. official no but its just a way of programming and using websites. more like web applications

[lmclaney]

Well Web 2.0 when coined by Tim O’Reilly at 2004 web conference was to

descibe "an attitude rather than a technology", so there is no physical web2.0 or web 3.0. Web 2.0 is mainly about user generated content like social networking sites such as Myspace, blogs, Flickr, wikipedia. Its just that people have now begun to associate certain technologies (such as ajax) and graphical styles to web 2.0 even though when Tim O'Reilly first came up with web 2.0 he wasnt including technologies or certain graphical styles.

Well some people have been mentioning web 3.0 and this is where the user will have a permanent connection to the internet and collective intelligence.

But anyway look up Tim O'Reilly's speach to find out more about web 2.0.

[D856C]

Social networking sites don't require ajax as much as they require an in-depth ability to understand users. ...In that case a lot of people are building Cliche 2.0 sites.

If web 2.0 is "social" then what more crucial requirement than user testing? And what's the number one step jettisoned in web design? User testing. Or at least preventing the user from delivering any bad news.

User psychology id difficult. Social psychology is even more difficult. And so where does discussion go?

Asking about the logo reflection in a forum, or whether there isn't one more AJAX gimmick we couldn't shove into a site -- that's not about social computing. Nor is it about user testing with proper methodology.

So, what would be the more anti - social way to develop a site? For programmers to look at Web 2.0 and concentrate on just the ajax programming. ...For graphic artists to focus just on the slick look. ....And for development firms to develop a single minded focus on billable and giving the client just what they ask for -- good and hard.

What O'Reilly should have covered is how a fairly sophisticated concept can get over-simplified and over-hyped when released into wider society. That would evidence some grasp of cognitive science and just plain old social smarts.