Comments on: A disclaimer…. 1.0, 2.0, 3.0 http://www.diversity.net.nz/a-disclaimer-10-20-30/2007/08/12/ Commentary and Analysis for User-Centered Technology Fri, 10 Feb 2012 03:02:25 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: O’Reilly annoints SaaS… And dismisses versioning the web? at diversity.net.nz http://www.diversity.net.nz/a-disclaimer-10-20-30/2007/08/12/comment-page-1/#comment-3587 O’Reilly annoints SaaS… And dismisses versioning the web? at diversity.net.nz Fri, 25 Apr 2008 19:38:28 +0000 http://diversity.net.nz/?p=182#comment-3587 [...] very nicely dovetails with something I posted about an entire 8 months ago - ah smug self [...] [...] very nicely dovetails with something I posted about an entire 8 months ago – ah smug self [...]

]]> By: Web 2.0 a discussion…. « business, strategy, governance http://www.diversity.net.nz/a-disclaimer-10-20-30/2007/08/12/comment-page-1/#comment-250 Web 2.0 a discussion…. « business, strategy, governance Tue, 28 Aug 2007 18:44:19 +0000 http://diversity.net.nz/?p=182#comment-250 [...] 2.0 a discussion…. As posted previously - I prefer to talk about Web x.0 rather than web 2.0. In my opinion giving the title 2.0 to [...] [...] 2.0 a discussion…. As posted previously – I prefer to talk about Web x.0 rather than web 2.0. In my opinion giving the title 2.0 to [...]

]]> By: Seth Wagoner http://www.diversity.net.nz/a-disclaimer-10-20-30/2007/08/12/comment-page-1/#comment-249 Seth Wagoner Mon, 20 Aug 2007 02:00:33 +0000 http://diversity.net.nz/?p=182#comment-249 Hmmm. If the capitalisation is intentional shouldn't the abbreviation match the phrase? Ie HbD? I think "Web x.0" makes a lot more sense than web 3.0 - having 300 definitions of Web 3.0 is not useful, and really the term will never have even a shred of real meaning until O'Reilly himself proclaims what Web 3.0 really is, how it differs from 2.0, and they throw a conference about it. Everyone else is just kidding themselves :-) I tend to just use "2.0" to encompass anything anyone else tries to call 3.0 at the moment, but maybe x.0 has potential as well. I might start using SaaS/v is casual conversation and see how long it takes people to say "what the frick are you on about" rather than just nodding their heads like they understand. :-) I like new nomenclature and neologisms as well. For instance guess who owns unitasking.com? :-) Hmmm. If the capitalisation is intentional shouldn’t the abbreviation match the phrase? Ie HbD?

I think “Web x.0″ makes a lot more sense than web 3.0 – having 300 definitions of Web 3.0 is not useful, and really the term will never have even a shred of real meaning until O’Reilly himself proclaims what Web 3.0 really is, how it differs from 2.0, and they throw a conference about it. Everyone else is just kidding themselves :-)

I tend to just use “2.0″ to encompass anything anyone else tries to call 3.0 at the moment, but maybe x.0 has potential as well.

I might start using SaaS/v is casual conversation and see how long it takes people to say “what the frick are you on about” rather than just nodding their heads like they understand. :-)

I like new nomenclature and neologisms as well. For instance guess who owns unitasking.com? :-)

]]>