Posts tagged "blogoposium"
Considering the continued talk of the Web 2.0 bubble these days, it’s important to take a step back and learn from past mistakes. There is much to learn from what we now call ‘Web 1.0’. These are some of the lessons I’ve pulled from my recollection of the dot.bombs.
Smart growth and market share are typically more important than short-term profitability –
dot.bomb success story Amazon.com and dot.bomb debacle Webvan
Acquisitions and mergers do not necessarily legitamize anything –
The AOL Time Warner deal
Don’t rely on advertising as the sole means to sell your business –
dot.bomb debacles include computer.com and pets.com
Established players will eventually understand and better the game –
Consider how any number of Old Economy companies have used a website (and more generally, the web) to absolutely transform their businesses
The thoughts above are part of my newest blogoposium – Lessons Learned from Web 1.0. To get involved in the discussion, go check out the details
“The one thing we have learned from history is that we don’t learn from history.”
– Winston Churchill
Last week, I voiced some of my concerns about Web 2.0 in a post entitled The Great Web and Web 2.0. Essentially, it spoke to the need for us to ask two questions about Web 2.0 investments – determining value propositions and business models (other than, “Buy me!”).
VCs like Fred Wilson (Web 2.0 Reactions), Rick Segal (Web 2.0!=check), and Paul Kedrosky (Blog Renamed: Infectious Greed 2.0) have also articulated some thoughts in relation to Web 2.0 feeling “bubble-ish” but they seem to be the exceptions to the rule.
Today, Kevin Burton takes a stronger stance in his Dot Bomb All Over Again?, where he writes, “A lot of the recent news around Web 2.0 is starting to frighten me. There is just too much money flying around with too much hype and too little value.”
Are we headed towards another bubble burst? I’m not certain that anyone can (consistently) predict the future with something as volatile as the web. What we can do, however, is learn from the past. We can learn from what we now call “Web 1.0″.
In my second blogoposium, I propose that we examine Lessons Learned from Web 1.0. We’ll discuss what so many dot bombs did wrong the first time around, think about the signs they missed, and hopefully come up with some “lessons learned” for all the Web 2.0 companies, investors, and VCs out there.
How to Participate
If you are confused about what a “blogoposium” is, check out the blogoposium category.
This blogoposium will run from Monday, October 17th through Wednesday, October 19th. There are several different ways to get your voice heard in this discussion:
Tag Your Post – Use the Technorati tag blogoposium2 in your post so that we can find your thoughts easily. You can also post any visuals up on Flickr to the “blogoposium2″ tag (thanks to Dion Hinchcliffe’s suggestion during our first blogoposium).
Tag Relevant Articles – Using del.icio.us, tag relevant items you find to “blogoposium2″. I will be monitoring the blogoposium2 tag and may highlight some of the more interesting thoughts (I’ve already added a handful of articles)
Trackback this Post *– Use the trackback below.
Or you can simply leave a comment below.
One final thing, I need your help! While we had an awesome turn out for the first blogoposium, I’d like to see something even better this time around – more bloggers with a larger variety of backgrounds. Please publicize the blogoposium in whatever way you see fit, so that when Monday rolls around everyone will be ready to go. Thanks and “see” you at the blogoposium!
Of course the Web 2.0 conversation will continue well past the blogoposium as it has existed well before it. Still, get in those last Web 2.0 thoughts today and tag your posts appropriately.
To see what has been contributed to this point:
Feel free to also weigh in on my Web 2.0 – As Defined by People post .
Thanks for making the first blogoposium a success. Definitely send along any feedback and let me know if you have any ideas to better facilitate this type of discussion.
I’d like to thank everyone for their continued contributions to the blogoposium. From the visualizations to the articulations, I’ve enjoyed your thoughts.
Web 2.0 has obviously been a hot topic in the blogosphere this week, outside of our little blogoposium experiment. Instead of highlighting yesterday’s thoughts, I’d like to point you to an archived version of tech.memeorandum. You’ll note that Web 2.0 was the top ‘meme’ and can reference all of the Web 2.0 relevant discussions.
Since I’ve been ‘hosting’ our part of the Web 2.0 conversation via blogoposium1, I won’t add my 2.0 cents. What I would like you to see though, are the concepts that people relate to Web 2.0. Before you take a peek below, I’d like you to note that this research is quite unscientific and it does not necessarily get to the heart of how we as techies, business folk, and other early adopters can actually articulate Web 2.0 ideas to the non-technical community. It only loosely identifies how we have been viewing Web 2.0 to this point.
I took a look at the Web 2.0 related tags and tag cloud for two different social bookmarking sites, del.icio.us and BlinkList. These diagrams paint a very abstract picture of concepts that people related to Web 2.0. In the del.icio.us example, I also choose to examine the related tags for ajax and tagging –
Finally, I took a number of my sources from my newly created Everything Web 2.0 Rollyo searchroll and created a TagCloud (you can check out those sources by accessing my Everything Web 2.0 searchroll – to read how TagCloud extracts keywords from RSS sources, go over to their about page)
I’ll leave the analysis to you…what do you think, are these diagrams on the right track? Are they missing anything? Are they helpful in describing Web 2.0?
A handful of highlights from those chiming in around the web thus far:
From Peter Forret’s RSS is a hammer
It’s not because you have particularly strong feelings about one building block of the Web 2.0 temple that you can simplify the whole thing. RSS is important. Ajax is important. And so are REST/XMLRPC/SOAP, KML, social software, folksonomies, contextual advertising, “Long tail” logic, Creative Commons, … It’s the sum of all these forces that hint at a future “Web 2.0″ that’s bigger and brighter.
Peter also recently contributed a Web 2.0 Meme Overview over on the Flickr blogoposium1 tag. He explains it in some detail in his Web 2.0 mememap overview post.
From Matteo Brunati’s My thoughts on the web2.0
The point IMHO is this: data is the main focus and if i want to control and personalize the tools i am using, the choice is fundamental… as for the standard format of the data…
From John Evan’s Is Web 2.0 RSS 2.0?
The success of Windows may now be an encumbrance to Microsoft as it faces the need to carve out new niches for itself in the emerging multiplex of markets often referred to as Web 2.0.
From Richard MacManus’ Web 2.0 Elevator Pitch
Web 2.0 at its most basic is using services on the Web. Some examples: Gmail for email, Flickr for photo-management, RSS for news delivery, eBay for shopping, Amazon for buying books. That’s why the Web is being called a platform – because all of these services are being built and used on the Web. Why Web 2.0 only now though – hasn’t Amazon been around since 1995? Why yes, but it’s taken until 2005 for broadband and web technology to catch up and reach a ‘tipping point’ – the Web is fast becoming the platform of choice for developers, business, media, public services, and so on.
Richard also highlights some other excellent Web 2.0 thoughts, by the likes of Om Malik, John Hagel (who also trackbacked his post to the blogoposium – thanks John!), and Susan Mernit.
Others including Stowe Boyd should be weighing in today or tomorrow. For those that don’t know about the blogoposium, please let them know, so that they can tag their posts. At the very least, make sure you tag them yourself under the blogoposium1 del.icio.us tag.
Finally, I’ve created a Everything Web 2.0 searchroll on Rollyo. Check it out and let me know what you think. I’m happy to add or remove sources based on the relevancy of results.