Re: [IxDA Discuss] Leading websites using Web 2.0
On Jan 4, 2008, at 2:58 PM, James W.Bond Jr. wrote: I am particularly fond of schematic's website www.schematic.com I'm confused... how is a site built basically as a big Flash movie a web 2.0 web site? -- Andrei Herasimchuk Principal, Involution Studios innovating the digital world e. [EMAIL PROTECTED] c. +1 408 306 6422 *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ... [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .. http://www.ixda.org/help
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Leading websites using Web 2.0
With all due respect, Pauric, I like Tim O'Reilly's vision of Web 2.0 better: It's really about data and who owns and controls, or gives the best access to, a class of data. All the rest is bells and whistles, much ado about nothing. Lipstick on a pig, as one clever member of this forum put it. Fashion can be timeless or ridiculous, and most of it of any era is the latter. I do like the look and feel presented by James Bond's example, but try to navigate schematic.com without a mouse. Design that hinders or disallows basic functionality should not be considered a step forward, but in these wild west days of Web 2.0, it often is. Google Mail is a much better example of taking Web 2.0 in a positive direction, and user response to it is proof. Suggested reading in the fiction section: Ender's Game, by Orson Scott Card. Ender changed the world by teaching himself to think multidimensionally. Emerging technologies on the Web don't evolve in a straight line, as the Nova Spivak diagram suggests, and timelines are most useful in hindsight. A better mental model might be based on atomic models in chemistry -- the periodic table, covalent bonding, the double helix and such. Cheers, Jeff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Posted from the new ixda.org http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=24104 *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ... [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .. http://www.ixda.org/help
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Leading websites using Web 2.0
Hi All: As it happens, I am deep in writing a book about interaction design and Web 2.0, so I've been thinking a lot about the definition of Web 2.0. I'd be really happy to get your thoughts about it. Like Jeff, I like elements of the O'Reilly definition a lot. However, it is too old to serve as a good definition of Web 2.0 as it exists today. The web has evolved a lot since 2005. Here is how I am now conceptualizing it: 1. Web 2.0 is an evolutionary stage in the web. The maturation of several technologies has created a qualitative change in our ability to create rich web applications with UI's that approach the quality of interactions that can be designed for a desktop computer. 2. Web 2.0 is comprised of three dimensions: - the information web - the service web - the relationship web I usually show this as a pie chart with three sectors. The value of thinking about Web 2.0 as these three dimensions is that it focuses on three sets of capabilities that define current web capabilities. The Information Web: Delivering Content --- In Web 1.0 this was the HTML web. Now, with cheap storage, large databases and XML we have the ability to manage large amounts of content. For example, you can now read the New York Times on-line and navigate it comfortably. As Web 3.0 matures, this dimension will take its next evolutionary step. The Service Web: Processing --- The service web is about the ability to perform sophisticated computer processing. In Web 1,0, only lightweight processing was possible without huge investments in programming. This limited most web sites to fairly simple transactions. A few services like merchant gateways were available but building a complex environment like Amazon or Ebay was a massive development effort. Improvements in databases and programming platforms (Java, .Net, for example) and the development of standards like web services has changed this. It enables businesses to develop industrial strength web applications that are capable of performing serious processing and managing huge databases while interacting with the user through a browser interface. This makes every web site a potential web application. The Relationship Web: Communication, Collaboration and User Created Content -- The relationship web is the dimension that enables communication and collaboration. Much of this is peer to peer, so users can interact with each other. Users can also create content and share it. The relationship web is made possible possible because of broadband connectivity and the greatly improvement in the power of desktop computing. This enables. for example, a user with a desktop to create and edit video, upload it to YouTube and share it with millions of people globally. What do you all think? Charlie . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Posted from the new ixda.org http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=24104 *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ... [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .. http://www.ixda.org/help
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Leading websites using Web 2.0
Jeff, I'm not suggesting one definition is generally better than the other. The philosophical and the implementation views compliment each other. O'Reilly succinctly described what the new technologies were enabling, at a high level. I do believe the perspective put forward by Spivak helps us look at the layer down from O'Reilly to understand what was, is and might be. And, in the context of this thread, help us decide objectively if a flash site can be described as having 2.0-like functionality or just brochureware in shinny 2.0 styling. I feel its very much the latter. I used the word alternate, as in perspective, not opposing view. I could have phrased that better. Now, you said All the rest is bells and whistles, much ado about nothing I think its a little more chicken and egg than that. You cant have data and who owns and controls, or gives the best access to, a class of data. without the underlying technology to enable that. And until we see what is made of the underlying nuts and bolts, we wont be able to predict what the next burst in innovation will be. Nova's model helped him predict where things are heading: http://www.twine.com/ and I believe he's on the money. Emerging technologies on the Web don't evolve in a straight line The Spivak graph plots complexity against time, similar to Moores Law and in line with the general continuous evolution of technology. Of course nothing evolves in a straight line. A better mental model might be based on atomic models in chemistry %u2014 the periodic table And the periodic table was used to predict elements that did not occur naturally. I accept the graph is overly simplistic but reject that its fundamentally flawed in capturing what is 2.0 and what might be 3.0, 4.0 etc I've yet to see a better infograph of what leads to singularity. take care, p . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Posted from the new ixda.org http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=24104 *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ... [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .. http://www.ixda.org/help
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Leading websites using Web 2.0
Charlie, I agree wholeheartedly with your assessment. The value of thinking about Web 2.0 as these three dimensions is that it focuses on three sets of capabilities that define current web capabilities. I realized that I should have pointed out that Nova's graph should be viewed as having 3 axis, whether that was his intention or not: again - http://tinyurl.com/36byj9 x = social complexity, or as Charlie describes it, the relationship web y = increasing depth of semantic connection, roughly mapping on to what you describe as the 'The Service Web', am I correct in that thinking? z = time, now you describe this as 'The Information Web' I'm inclined to think that based on your description of this part of your piechart that you're looking at what becomes enabled as technology advances, which is based on time. very interesting, thanks for sharing your thoughts, looking forward to the book regards - pauric . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Posted from the new ixda.org http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=24104 *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ... [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .. http://www.ixda.org/help
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Leading websites using Web 2.0
Hi Pauric: I see why you are making the connection with the Nova Spivak model. My model is compatible with it but I don't think that my three dimensions map to his. Spivak is showing a timeline of how technology evolution brings the web to new levels. I agree with his characterization and in my post I tried to outline my view of the technologies that have led to the current web. What I am trying to do with my model is to characterize the web as it exists today. i think of it as Web 2.1 - more evolved than the web 2.0 that O'Reilly described. Think about the types of activities you can do on a web site: 1. You can view content. That's the dimension of the information web. Information architects and publishers would be highly involved with that dimension. 2. You can execute transactions. You can pay for something, execute a search, or perform another transaction. This requires some heavy computing and I think of the service web. 3. You can communicate and collaborate. Post on a blog or do what we are doing right now. That's the relationship web. Any particular web application will probably have all three but in varying amounts. Fo example, YouTube is strong on the information side (lot's of content) and moderate on the relationship side (some community but not really sophisticated). Facebook is high on the relationship web dimension but not particularly focused on content. Amazon's S3 (Simple Storage Service) is a utility that allows programs to obtain as much storage as they requires. So if I have a web application and I need to store a 2GB movie, I can just connect to Amazon and ask it for the storage. They'll bill me monthly for it as long as I use it. That's a service web function. Now if Amazon decided to add a discussion forum so users of S3 could talk about their experiences, that would add more of the relationship web. And if they posted detailed reports on usage, that would bring in the information web. I will say that for me, the value of this model is simply to get everyone on the same page. No model is going to be perfect but people seems to respond to this one when I give talks on Web 2.0 and it helps lay the foundation for further discussion. Charlie . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Posted from the new ixda.org http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=24104 *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ... [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .. http://www.ixda.org/help
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Leading websites using Web 2.0
I am particularly fond of schematic's website .schematic.com . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Posted from the new ixda.org http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=24104 *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ... [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .. http://www.ixda.org/help
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Leading websites using Web 2.0
That's brilliant. Really slick, clean. A little overwhelming, however, when you view it from a high level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Posted from the new ixda.org http://gamma.ixda.org/discuss?post=24104 *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ... [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .. http://www.ixda.org/help
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Leading websites using Web 2.0
Hi Chaitrali, On a related note. I know you asked about Web2.0 technology. But during the *Future of Web Design* conference in NYC a few months ago, Elliot Jay presented his view that the Web2.0 look is something that needs to be destroyed. Even the term Web2.0 seems controversial, depending on the context within which it's being used...but after watching his highly entertaining presentation, I'm inclined to agree that this look needs to go. So just in case you or someone you care about is on the verge of creating a reflected logo or a diagonally-striped background in order to support that Web2 technology, please check out the following: http://elliotjaystocks.com/blog/archive/2007/destroy-the-web-20-look-future-of-web-design-new-york/ Regards, Gloria *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ... [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .. http://www.ixda.org/help
[IxDA Discuss] Leading websites using Web 2.0
Can you folks point to some websites that optimise the use of web 2.0technology for enhancing user experience? Chaitrali User Experience Design group 408 338 9551 *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ... [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .. http://www.ixda.org/help
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Leading websites using Web 2.0
In fact Chaitrali, you are using one of the powerful Web 2.0 applications in terms of usability which is Gmail. Another also by google is Google Maps. Some interesting links to design issues of RIA- Rich Internet Applications are: http://www.useit.com/jakob/ http://www.digital-web.com/articles/usability_for_rich_internet_applications/ http://www.uie.com/articles/web_2_power/ BBC News article again by Nielsen http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6653119.stm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Posted from the new ixda.org http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=24104 *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ... [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .. http://www.ixda.org/help
