Yes, its time to guess what Web 3.0 is again - this time its
Read/Write Web's turn:
Last April, we held a contest asking readers for their web 3.0 definitions. Our favorite came from Robert O'Brien, who defined Web 3.0 as a "decentralized asynchronous me."
"Web 1.0: Centralized Them. Web 2.0: Distributed Us. Web 3.0: Decentralized Me," he wrote. "[Web 3.0 is] about me when I don't want to participate in the world. It's about me when I want to have more control of my environment particularly who I let in. When my attention is stretched who/what do I pay attention to and who do I let pay attention to me. It is more effective communication for me!"
And also.....
ReadWriteWeb contributor Sramana Mitra put it another way on this blog last February, when she said that web 3.0 will be about adding context to personalization. "Personalization has remained limited to some unsatisfactory efforts by the MyYahoo team, their primary disadvantage being the lack of a starting Context," she wrote. "In Web 3.0, I predict, we are going to start seeing roll-ups. We will see a trunk that emerges from the Context, be it film (Netflix), music (iTunes), cooking / food, working women, single parents, ...
I took a quick walk down memory lane,
courtesy of Wikipaedia and found the following previous shots at the pie:
In May 2006, Tim Berners-Lee, inventor of the World Wide Web stated[1]:
“ People keep asking what Web 3.0 is. I think maybe when you've got an overlay of scalable vector graphics - everything rippling and folding and looking misty - on Web 2.0 and access to a semantic Web integrated across a huge space of data, you'll have access to an unbelievable data resource. ”
—Tim Berners-Lee, A 'more revolutionary' Web
At the Seoul Digital Forum in May 2007, Eric Schmidt, CEO of Google, was asked to define Web 2.0 and Web 3.0.[2] He responded:
“
Web 2.0 is a marketing term, and I think you've just invented Web 3.0.
But if I were to guess what Web 3.0 is, I would tell you that it's a different way of building applications... My prediction would be that Web 3.0 will ultimately be seen as applications which are pieced together. There are a number of characteristics: the applications are relatively small, the data is in the cloud, the applications can run on any device, PC or mobile phone, the applications are very fast and they're very customizable. Furthermore, the applications are distributed virally: literally by social networks, by email. You won't go to the store and purchase them... That's a very different application model than we've ever seen in computing.
”
—Eric Schmidt
At the Technet Summit in November 2006, Jerry Yang, founder and Chief of Yahoo, stated [2]:
“ Web 2.0 is well documented and talked about. The power of the Net reached a critical mass, with capabilities that can be done on a network level. We are also seeing richer devices over last four years and richer ways of interacting with the network, not only in hardware like game consoles and mobile devices, but also in the software layer. You don't have to be a computer scientist to create a program. We are seeing that manifest in Web 2.0 and 3.0 will be a great extension of that, a true communal medium…the distinction between professional, semi-professional and consumers will get blurred, creating a network effect of business and applications. ”
—Jerry Yang
At the same Technet Summit, Reed Hastings, founder and CEO of Netflix, stated a simpler formula for defining the phases of the Web:
“ Web 1.0 was dial-up, 50K average bandwidth, Web 2.0 is an average 1 megabit of bandwidth and Web 3.0 will be 10 megabits of bandwidth all the time, which will be the full video Web, and that will feel like Web 3.0.
”
And there's more there.......
The Read/Write Web article actually riffs off an article by Grauniad Journalist
Jemima Kiss, who - having spoken to Last.fm - wrote that:
If web 2.0 could be summarised as interaction, web 3.0 must be about recommendation and personalisation. While the Tim Berners-Lees of this world work out how to make the language of the web function more effectively behind the scenes, our front-of-house task is to get stuck in and intelligently work these technologies into our businesses. It is not enough to understand the strategy behind these new applications, such as Twitter and Reddit - they rely on participation. Tokenism won't do.
Our take - heck, there's still a lot to do to get Web 2.1 off the ground - as we noted earlier today, Social Networks are
still pretty rudimentary!
But if we were to bet, it would be to look under the presentation layer to the infrastructure layer - "Web 2.0" only came about due to broadband penetration and lower cost software, hardware and hosting - the subsequent gains in efficiency from the apps, widget etc are second order effects. To me, personalisation etc is tuning what we have already
Thus, we'd look for what will ride on the next big jumps in efficiency - the network/computing grid and dis-aggregated software components - and the millions of dumb machines that will use them.....
