Just get on with it man!
May 29, 2006 at 9:03 pm
A post by Richard Mc Manus (of “Web 2.0 is dead” fame….perhaps a little too soon Ricky) in which he takes the piss out of the fact that IBM and Gartner are now talking about Web 2.0 . He also cites the fact that he was at a New Zealand government conference and the term was being bandied about and being used ‘profusely (and appropriately)’.
It smacks of arrogance and bitterness in my opinion, but is ironicly stoopid also. Web 2.0 is essentially about inclusion and people participating and all those kind of good things. McManus’ posturing reminds me of crappy DJ-land where suddenly the music isn’t deemed as good when it’s gone mainstream. It’s all wrong. Mainstream doesn’t have to mean contrived formulated pop all the time, sometimes it can mean success for something that’s great too.
McManus then goes on in 5 year old fashion about how he was one of the first to bandy the term Web 2.0 about (so there, that’s you knocked out of the sand pit!), etc etc.
The one good thing he writes though – in fairness – is a rather tidy assessment to those who are doing it (and doin’ it….like a certain hip hop tune that went mainstream!):
Web 2.0 hasn’t died, it’s actually morphed into a mainstream term that Gartner and IBM use. I still think it means everything — and nothing — at the same time. But in a weird way this has meant Web 2.0 has become the kind of umbrella term and catch-phrase that people identify with. From the 100 or so new and varied definitions of Web 2.0 you read every week (increasingly from mainstream media), to Dion Hinchcliffe’s relentless pursuit of defining Web 2.0 for the enterprise, to VCs using the term to connote ‘the period after dot com’, to TechCrunch profiling the products of Web 2.0 and itself becoming a Web 2.0 success story, to Microsoft adopting Web 2.0 but re-naming it to The Live Web, to Yahoo continuing to put theory into practice and not naming it anything, to Google just doing it’s own thing and being damn successful, to Valleywag rising up and creating a hilarious snark blog about the current boom, to ‘old school’ techs like Marc Canter and Dave Winer thriving in this new era, to Gen Y kids creating multi-million dollar businesses like YouTube and Facebook, yada yada.
You redeemed yourself Mr Mc.
Just get on with it man!
May 29, 2006 at 9:03 pm
A post by Richard Mc Manus (of “Web 2.0 is dead” fame….perhaps a little too soon Ricky) in which he takes the piss out of the fact that IBM and Gartner are now talking about Web 2.0 . He also cites the fact that he was at a New Zealand government conference and the term was being bandied about and being used ‘profusely (and appropriately)’.
It smacks of arrogance and bitterness in my opinion, but is ironicly stoopid also. Web 2.0 is essentially about inclusion and people participating and all those kind of good things. McManus’ posturing reminds me of crappy DJ-land where suddenly the music isn’t deemed as good when it’s gone mainstream. It’s all wrong. Mainstream doesn’t have to mean contrived formulated pop all the time, sometimes it can mean success for something that’s great too.
McManus then goes on in 5 year old fashion about how he was one of the first to bandy the term Web 2.0 about (so there, that’s you knocked out of the sand pit!), etc etc.
The one good thing he writes though – in fairness – is a rather tidy assessment to those who are doing it (and doin’ it….like a certain hip hop tune that went mainstream!):
Web 2.0 hasn’t died, it’s actually morphed into a mainstream term that Gartner and IBM use. I still think it means everything — and nothing — at the same time. But in a weird way this has meant Web 2.0 has become the kind of umbrella term and catch-phrase that people identify with. From the 100 or so new and varied definitions of Web 2.0 you read every week (increasingly from mainstream media), to Dion Hinchcliffe’s relentless pursuit of defining Web 2.0 for the enterprise, to VCs using the term to connote ‘the period after dot com’, to TechCrunch profiling the products of Web 2.0 and itself becoming a Web 2.0 success story, to Microsoft adopting Web 2.0 but re-naming it to The Live Web, to Yahoo continuing to put theory into practice and not naming it anything, to Google just doing it’s own thing and being damn successful, to Valleywag rising up and creating a hilarious snark blog about the current boom, to ‘old school’ techs like Marc Canter and Dave Winer thriving in this new era, to Gen Y kids creating multi-million dollar businesses like YouTube and Facebook, yada yada.
You redeemed yourself Mr Mc.
Just get on with it man!
May 29, 2006 at 9:03 pm
A post by Richard Mc Manus (of “Web 2.0 is dead” fame….perhaps a little too soon Ricky) in which he takes the piss out of the fact that IBM and Gartner are now talking about Web 2.0 . He also cites the fact that he was at a New Zealand government conference and the term was being bandied about and being used ‘profusely (and appropriately)’.
It smacks of arrogance and bitterness in my opinion, but is ironicly stoopid also. Web 2.0 is essentially about inclusion and people participating and all those kind of good things. McManus’ posturing reminds me of crappy DJ-land where suddenly the music isn’t deemed as good when it’s gone mainstream. It’s all wrong. Mainstream doesn’t have to mean contrived formulated pop all the time, sometimes it can mean success for something that’s great too.
McManus then goes on in 5 year old fashion about how he was one of the first to bandy the term Web 2.0 about (so there, that’s you knocked out of the sand pit!), etc etc.
The one good thing he writes though – in fairness – is a rather tidy assessment to those who are doing it (and doin’ it….like a certain hip hop tune that went mainstream!):
Web 2.0 hasn’t died, it’s actually morphed into a mainstream term that Gartner and IBM use. I still think it means everything — and nothing — at the same time. But in a weird way this has meant Web 2.0 has become the kind of umbrella term and catch-phrase that people identify with. From the 100 or so new and varied definitions of Web 2.0 you read every week (increasingly from mainstream media), to Dion Hinchcliffe’s relentless pursuit of defining Web 2.0 for the enterprise, to VCs using the term to connote ‘the period after dot com’, to TechCrunch profiling the products of Web 2.0 and itself becoming a Web 2.0 success story, to Microsoft adopting Web 2.0 but re-naming it to The Live Web, to Yahoo continuing to put theory into practice and not naming it anything, to Google just doing it’s own thing and being damn successful, to Valleywag rising up and creating a hilarious snark blog about the current boom, to ‘old school’ techs like Marc Canter and Dave Winer thriving in this new era, to Gen Y kids creating multi-million dollar businesses like YouTube and Facebook, yada yada.
You redeemed yourself Mr Mc.
Just get on with it man!
May 29, 2006 at 9:03 pm
A post by Richard Mc Manus (of “Web 2.0 is dead” fame….perhaps a little too soon Ricky) in which he takes the piss out of the fact that IBM and Gartner are now talking about Web 2.0 . He also cites the fact that he was at a New Zealand government conference and the term was being bandied about and being used ‘profusely (and appropriately)’.
It smacks of arrogance and bitterness in my opinion, but is ironicly stoopid also. Web 2.0 is essentially about inclusion and people participating and all those kind of good things. McManus’ posturing reminds me of crappy DJ-land where suddenly the music isn’t deemed as good when it’s gone mainstream. It’s all wrong. Mainstream doesn’t have to mean contrived formulated pop all the time, sometimes it can mean success for something that’s great too.
McManus then goes on in 5 year old fashion about how he was one of the first to bandy the term Web 2.0 about (so there, that’s you knocked out of the sand pit!), etc etc.
The one good thing he writes though – in fairness – is a rather tidy assessment to those who are doing it (and doin’ it….like a certain hip hop tune that went mainstream!):
Web 2.0 hasn’t died, it’s actually morphed into a mainstream term that Gartner and IBM use. I still think it means everything — and nothing — at the same time. But in a weird way this has meant Web 2.0 has become the kind of umbrella term and catch-phrase that people identify with. From the 100 or so new and varied definitions of Web 2.0 you read every week (increasingly from mainstream media), to Dion Hinchcliffe’s relentless pursuit of defining Web 2.0 for the enterprise, to VCs using the term to connote ‘the period after dot com’, to TechCrunch profiling the products of Web 2.0 and itself becoming a Web 2.0 success story, to Microsoft adopting Web 2.0 but re-naming it to The Live Web, to Yahoo continuing to put theory into practice and not naming it anything, to Google just doing it’s own thing and being damn successful, to Valleywag rising up and creating a hilarious snark blog about the current boom, to ‘old school’ techs like Marc Canter and Dave Winer thriving in this new era, to Gen Y kids creating multi-million dollar businesses like YouTube and Facebook, yada yada.
You redeemed yourself Mr Mc.
Just get on with it man!
May 29, 2006 at 9:03 pm
A post by Richard Mc Manus (of “Web 2.0 is dead” fame….perhaps a little too soon Ricky) in which he takes the piss out of the fact that IBM and Gartner are now talking about Web 2.0 . He also cites the fact that he was at a New Zealand government conference and the term was being bandied about and being used ‘profusely (and appropriately)’.
It smacks of arrogance and bitterness in my opinion, but is ironicly stoopid also. Web 2.0 is essentially about inclusion and people participating and all those kind of good things. McManus’ posturing reminds me of crappy DJ-land where suddenly the music isn’t deemed as good when it’s gone mainstream. It’s all wrong. Mainstream doesn’t have to mean contrived formulated pop all the time, sometimes it can mean success for something that’s great too.
McManus then goes on in 5 year old fashion about how he was one of the first to bandy the term Web 2.0 about (so there, that’s you knocked out of the sand pit!), etc etc.
The one good thing he writes though – in fairness – is a rather tidy assessment to those who are doing it (and doin’ it….like a certain hip hop tune that went mainstream!):
Web 2.0 hasn’t died, it’s actually morphed into a mainstream term that Gartner and IBM use. I still think it means everything — and nothing — at the same time. But in a weird way this has meant Web 2.0 has become the kind of umbrella term and catch-phrase that people identify with. From the 100 or so new and varied definitions of Web 2.0 you read every week (increasingly from mainstream media), to Dion Hinchcliffe’s relentless pursuit of defining Web 2.0 for the enterprise, to VCs using the term to connote ‘the period after dot com’, to TechCrunch profiling the products of Web 2.0 and itself becoming a Web 2.0 success story, to Microsoft adopting Web 2.0 but re-naming it to The Live Web, to Yahoo continuing to put theory into practice and not naming it anything, to Google just doing it’s own thing and being damn successful, to Valleywag rising up and creating a hilarious snark blog about the current boom, to ‘old school’ techs like Marc Canter and Dave Winer thriving in this new era, to Gen Y kids creating multi-million dollar businesses like YouTube and Facebook, yada yada.
You redeemed yourself Mr Mc.
Just get on with it man!
May 29, 2006 at 9:03 pm
A post by Richard Mc Manus (of “Web 2.0 is dead” fame….perhaps a little too soon Ricky) in which he takes the piss out of the fact that IBM and Gartner are now talking about Web 2.0 . He also cites the fact that he was at a New Zealand government conference and the term was being bandied about and being used ‘profusely (and appropriately)’.
It smacks of arrogance and bitterness in my opinion, but is ironicly stoopid also. Web 2.0 is essentially about inclusion and people participating and all those kind of good things. McManus’ posturing reminds me of crappy DJ-land where suddenly the music isn’t deemed as good when it’s gone mainstream. It’s all wrong. Mainstream doesn’t have to mean contrived formulated pop all the time, sometimes it can mean success for something that’s great too.
McManus then goes on in 5 year old fashion about how he was one of the first to bandy the term Web 2.0 about (so there, that’s you knocked out of the sand pit!), etc etc.
The one good thing he writes though – in fairness – is a rather tidy assessment to those who are doing it (and doin’ it….like a certain hip hop tune that went mainstream!):
Web 2.0 hasn’t died, it’s actually morphed into a mainstream term that Gartner and IBM use. I still think it means everything — and nothing — at the same time. But in a weird way this has meant Web 2.0 has become the kind of umbrella term and catch-phrase that people identify with. From the 100 or so new and varied definitions of Web 2.0 you read every week (increasingly from mainstream media), to Dion Hinchcliffe’s relentless pursuit of defining Web 2.0 for the enterprise, to VCs using the term to connote ‘the period after dot com’, to TechCrunch profiling the products of Web 2.0 and itself becoming a Web 2.0 success story, to Microsoft adopting Web 2.0 but re-naming it to The Live Web, to Yahoo continuing to put theory into practice and not naming it anything, to Google just doing it’s own thing and being damn successful, to Valleywag rising up and creating a hilarious snark blog about the current boom, to ‘old school’ techs like Marc Canter and Dave Winer thriving in this new era, to Gen Y kids creating multi-million dollar businesses like YouTube and Facebook, yada yada.
You redeemed yourself Mr Mc.
Just get on with it man!
May 29, 2006 at 9:03 pm
A post by Richard Mc Manus (of “Web 2.0 is dead” fame….perhaps a little too soon Ricky) in which he takes the piss out of the fact that IBM and Gartner are now talking about Web 2.0 . He also cites the fact that he was at a New Zealand government conference and the term was being bandied about and being used ‘profusely (and appropriately)’.
It smacks of arrogance and bitterness in my opinion, but is ironicly stoopid also. Web 2.0 is essentially about inclusion and people participating and all those kind of good things. McManus’ posturing reminds me of crappy DJ-land where suddenly the music isn’t deemed as good when it’s gone mainstream. It’s all wrong. Mainstream doesn’t have to mean contrived formulated pop all the time, sometimes it can mean success for something that’s great too.
McManus then goes on in 5 year old fashion about how he was one of the first to bandy the term Web 2.0 about (so there, that’s you knocked out of the sand pit!), etc etc.
The one good thing he writes though – in fairness – is a rather tidy assessment to those who are doing it (and doin’ it….like a certain hip hop tune that went mainstream!):
Web 2.0 hasn’t died, it’s actually morphed into a mainstream term that Gartner and IBM use. I still think it means everything — and nothing — at the same time. But in a weird way this has meant Web 2.0 has become the kind of umbrella term and catch-phrase that people identify with. From the 100 or so new and varied definitions of Web 2.0 you read every week (increasingly from mainstream media), to Dion Hinchcliffe’s relentless pursuit of defining Web 2.0 for the enterprise, to VCs using the term to connote ‘the period after dot com’, to TechCrunch profiling the products of Web 2.0 and itself becoming a Web 2.0 success story, to Microsoft adopting Web 2.0 but re-naming it to The Live Web, to Yahoo continuing to put theory into practice and not naming it anything, to Google just doing it’s own thing and being damn successful, to Valleywag rising up and creating a hilarious snark blog about the current boom, to ‘old school’ techs like Marc Canter and Dave Winer thriving in this new era, to Gen Y kids creating multi-million dollar businesses like YouTube and Facebook, yada yada.
You redeemed yourself Mr Mc.
World’s Finest Site Goes Web 2.0
May 29, 2006 at 12:13 pm
BBC announced plans that it intends to rebuild its website and guess what – it’s looking very Web 2.0-ish! Anyone who has attended my web writing training course will know that I’m a big fan of the Beeb online. If you’re ever writing for web and find yourself a little stuck, just visist www.bbc.co.uk and see how it’s meant to be done. So, it’s a great validation of what I believe in to know that the world’s finest site is re-defining itself in the direction that we’re proposing to clients, prospects and just about anybody that will listen!
The new BBC site will be based around three concepts: “share” “find” and “play”.
The share concept will allow you to create their own space and build the beeb site around you. You can post your own blogs, upload videos you’ve made, podcasts, whatever you like. Like myspace.com – only better (no doubt). For anyone who hasn’t even been tempted to have a peek around the world’s most popular social networking site, it’s time you did now: visit MySpace.
The find concept will be based on the fact that BBC is going to upload all of its programme catalogue for the first time. The catalogue goes back to 1937, so this will be like nirvana for telly addicts.
And the BBC iPlayer will offer catch-up television up to 7 days after transmission. For fans of long running hospital drama “Casualty” it means you can now have a social life! Go out on Sat night and download the show to watch on your laptop or on your mobile (if you’re that way inclined).
Watch this space for more on Web 2.0 later this week as Brightspark decamp to Copenhagen to take part in Reboot.
World’s Finest Site Goes Web 2.0
May 29, 2006 at 12:13 pm
BBC announced plans that it intends to rebuild its website and guess what – it’s looking very Web 2.0-ish! Anyone who has attended my web writing training course will know that I’m a big fan of the Beeb online. If you’re ever writing for web and find yourself a little stuck, just visist www.bbc.co.uk and see how it’s meant to be done. So, it’s a great validation of what I believe in to know that the world’s finest site is re-defining itself in the direction that we’re proposing to clients, prospects and just about anybody that will listen!
The new BBC site will be based around three concepts: “share” “find” and “play”.
The share concept will allow you to create their own space and build the beeb site around you. You can post your own blogs, upload videos you’ve made, podcasts, whatever you like. Like myspace.com – only better (no doubt). For anyone who hasn’t even been tempted to have a peek around the world’s most popular social networking site, it’s time you did now: visit MySpace.
The find concept will be based on the fact that BBC is going to upload all of its programme catalogue for the first time. The catalogue goes back to 1937, so this will be like nirvana for telly addicts.
And the BBC iPlayer will offer catch-up television up to 7 days after transmission. For fans of long running hospital drama “Casualty” it means you can now have a social life! Go out on Sat night and download the show to watch on your laptop or on your mobile (if you’re that way inclined).
Watch this space for more on Web 2.0 later this week as Brightspark decamp to Copenhagen to take part in Reboot.
World’s Finest Site Goes Web 2.0
May 29, 2006 at 12:13 pm
BBC announced plans that it intends to rebuild its website and guess what – it’s looking very Web 2.0-ish! Anyone who has attended my web writing training course will know that I’m a big fan of the Beeb online. If you’re ever writing for web and find yourself a little stuck, just visist www.bbc.co.uk and see how it’s meant to be done. So, it’s a great validation of what I believe in to know that the world’s finest site is re-defining itself in the direction that we’re proposing to clients, prospects and just about anybody that will listen!
The new BBC site will be based around three concepts: “share” “find” and “play”.
The share concept will allow you to create their own space and build the beeb site around you. You can post your own blogs, upload videos you’ve made, podcasts, whatever you like. Like myspace.com – only better (no doubt). For anyone who hasn’t even been tempted to have a peek around the world’s most popular social networking site, it’s time you did now: visit MySpace.
The find concept will be based on the fact that BBC is going to upload all of its programme catalogue for the first time. The catalogue goes back to 1937, so this will be like nirvana for telly addicts.
And the BBC iPlayer will offer catch-up television up to 7 days after transmission. For fans of long running hospital drama “Casualty” it means you can now have a social life! Go out on Sat night and download the show to watch on your laptop or on your mobile (if you’re that way inclined).
Watch this space for more on Web 2.0 later this week as Brightspark decamp to Copenhagen to take part in Reboot.
