Web 2.0: An Awkwardly-Pubescent Teenage Girl
Does anyone really know what Web 2.0 is? Honestly and down to earth has a good idea of exactly how all of “this” fits together? Sure, there are a lot of ideas, but they all seem to deviate from a deeper core.
“It’s about allowing the people greater control…”
“Web 2.0 is the freedom of information…”
“It’s flashy graphics and pretty interfaces…”
The French Revolution was about giving control to the people. The constitution was built on freedom of information, specifically, freedom of the press - to be able to spread information. And I’m pretty sure I saw enough flashy graphics in the 1990s and early 2000s where we had poorly designed websites and myspace “glitterz”.
None of these things are Web 2.0 and I describe us, the people of Web 2.0 itself, as an awkwardly-pubescent girl because that’s exactly how we’re thinking. We (Web 2.0) want to be so much with so little that we fracture ourselves and split off in too many directions.
I had a few friends in highschool that fit this bill exactly. They wanted so much out of those four years, that they sought to join practically every club and publication, as well as taking as many advanced courses as possible. They were part of Literary Magazine, Newspaper, Yearbook, Theatre, FBLA (Future Business Leaders of America), Honor Society. The list goes on…
But they didn’t really know what they wanted to do, because they tried to be too many different things.
I propose one thing that Web 2.0 is:
Quality over quantity!
Take social networks for example (Facebook, Bebo, etc.) They’ve succeeded for the most part, in deriving quality from your networks over quantity. No longer do we have to live with the likes of Hot or Not, Match.com, or True.com. We can network freely knowing that if we want a good, quality hookup, all we have to do is turn to our network and announce our available and seeking status.
Gmail has brought forth the same concept in email. Although you may be mistaken, it’s not about Gmail’s 6GB of email storage that you can get. They’re all about providing you with the best, user friendly features to increase your productive use of email. Better spam filters, threaded email conversations and more should only be the beginning.
What to do about this Web 2.0?
Don’t get me wrong, the web is amazing. But it’s not all about the web! More likely, I would say it’s a playground for experimentation in business on a larger scale.
Recently I’ve seen a large transformation in the food industry. America as a whole, has become very unhealthy. We’ve sought quantity over quality for ourselves for the past century as a result of the industrial revolution.
These last few years though when I go into Safeway, I’m seeing more organic foods on the shelves. Foods made with quality ingredients that are good for your body. I’m not suggesting that Web 2.0 caused this change, but rather it’s the same change that we see so vividly on the internet.
People want better food. They want quality food. They’re now willing to give up their Big Macs and 64oz Cokes for a good-for-you meal that also tastes good.
The automobile industry is making similar changes. People want a better driving experience. They want to be able to control their ipod using voice recognition. It’s much safer to drive and alot easier for the driver. Enter Microsoft SYNC.
SYNC is a good product, but not good enough. I call that when I’m in my car and I roll down the windows, SYNC should automatically turn up the volume to balance out the ambient noise of the wind rushing past my head. If an ambulance is in the area, SYNC should be able to hear and recognize where it is and tell me to pay attention for where it’s coming from.
It’s about quality people. Stop touting the amazing features your business has and start catering to the consumer’s needs. They want to be pampered, not overwhelmed.
Tags: business, consumer, control, quality, quantity, SYNC, web 2.0
I agree Cody, actually I think it’s one of those things where Europe has had a slight advantage over the years, and I am not only referring to the food industry.
I think that the way capitalism and industrialism was perceived in the 80’s and 90’s lead to this massification of pretty much everything. “The more the better”.
Web 2.0 in my view is all about focusing on content rather then form, and by doing so, the quality (or lack of it) stands out in a way that it didn’t in the past.
Well… I don’t know about the metaphor you assigned as article title after reading your article, Cody:
It is true that quality should be emphasized over quantity but honestly - quantity can be quantified and controlled and manipulated but quality or “X factor”? Much harder because now we’re talking about brands and branding.
Let me use a more archaic yet classic brand to illustrate. Star Wars episodes IV, V, and VI. Versus SW prequels/ep I, II, and III.
The archaic sequels will outlive George Lucas and long be remembered as the classical Good v. Evil story and Father v. Son story and the Accidental/Reluctant Hero story (all of which are archetypal mythological themes, and Lucas was supposedly one of Joseph Campbell’s “best (nonmatriculated) students”).
On the other hand, how cool are many of the effects in the prequels? Very, very cool. Don’t even get me started on those seismic detonators… beautiful concept, excellent experiential execution. But the storylines? Awful.
Web 2.0 is a bit like that… full of promises for delivering us into quality experiences we could only have dreamed of back when Netscape was “it”. Now it’s all about signing up for as many new fads and tools as possible because everyone else is signing up for them and you don’t want anyone else using your favorite screennames/handles/usernames before you do.
Hm… this can be a future post for microbusinessmentor.com .
@Pedro: Yes, Europe has had it’s advantages as of late, although that is just recently as Europe as a whole came together as the EU. Y’all finally got your act together and started acting as one rather than fully autonomous countries. You are much stronger now than the last millenium of dissagreements.
@Jane: That is exactly my point! The first 3 Star Wars (IV, V, VI) were much better because of better quality acting. That limitation in special effects and budget required better acting to compensate. Rather than the latest 3 movies relied largely on special effects that only promised to be “bigger and better”. There were more lightsabers, more fights, but that let them get lazy and they tossed out the quality.
The same goes for Web 2.0. AJAX, Javascript, and Flash promise bigger and better websites. They’re better for users because of X, Y, and Z. But the only thing that is being promised are more special effects. Without better usability it’s all for naught.