limits of web 2.0

Hmmm, I hate to say it, but this is more of a debate type question, than an ask for techie help type question that is normally answered here.

Many people argue that web 2.0 is nothing more than a marketing term, so therefore meaningless, I personally tend to agree with them as web 2.0 should be something more radical than what is currently stated in the "official" O'Reily texts. For me it doesn't go far enough. IMHO.

I'll probably get burned at the stake for that comment tho by the 2.0 purests for such comments.

S.

I will bring some water

Michel

But by far the most important thing is to have a offical web 2.0 glassy shine on any buttons.

:D

http://msig.info/web2.php

lol - point winning answer if you ask me.

Now thats a web 2.0 site.

Which brings me to another point. A lot of web 2.0 websites also have a single function.

Basically - if the site cannot be read by a screen reader for the disabled, cannot be used by any simple browser eg mobile phones, and requires you to click on big javascript buttons to do anything, that cause havoc for search engines, then you have a web 2.0 site!

Now i'm just being cynical... coz i forgot that they generally have to have real no commercial purpose, and oh, by the way don't forget that web 2.0 is owned and copyright O'Reilly Associates.

There are a few principals you can have tho that are useful... like only asking people to register when you absolutely-positively-can only identify people with a user name.  Keeping the site clean with as few ads as possible... Keeping your content as fresh and up to date as possible... wait a sec - thats just good web practice.

Basically have a look at the apple mac os - everything should be simpler and cleaner. Expect to see more internet on your TV... I'm tring to build something at the moment that is a small-ish pc with enough gumph and ease of use for your TV and capable of storing most of your mp3's/4's/tv timeshift...

I know I'll call it skypluxboxstation-xii 360 2.0