State of Web 2.0: more confused than State of the Union
Isn't this Tim O'Reilly's job? Longtime software developer and ZDNet columnist Dion Hinchcliffe gives the "State of Web 2.0" address, whether we asked for it or not. It's a monstrous, graph-choked essay, but once it hits the top of Tech Memeorandum, the boss will expect you to have some working knowledge. So to give you a brief run-down, I ran it through Microsoft Word's True-Meaning Document Summary tool:
¬ Now that Newsweek and Slate covered Web 2.0, maybe my blog will get me a book deal.
¬ You'll get attention by saying "Web 2.0." Yep, lots of attention from saying "Web 2.0" a lot. What I mean to say: Saying "Web 2.0" gets attention, because people love to hate or hate to love or love to write italics around the phrase "Web 2.0." Um, Web 2.0, Web 2.0, Web 2.0.
¬ Don't call it "linkbait that begs readers to fix it." Call it "harnessing collective intelligence."
¬ Web 2.0. Web 2.0. Web 2.0.
¬ Here's a graph (pictured — that is not a biology textbook spread) using the word "truthiness" with distressingly little irony.
¬ Gotta coin a phrase, right? How 'bout "Enterprise Web 2.0"? How you like them apples? Yeah, I thought you'd like it, baby. "Enterprise Web 2.0." It oozes sex.
¬ Mashups will mature or wane. Hedging my bets? Not at all.
¬ More graphs!
¬ Begging readers to fix this.
The State of Web 2.0 [Dion Hinchcliffe's Web 2.0 Blog]
Earlier: There's no bubble! No Bubble! Repeat after me! [Valleywag]