Paradigm-Shifts and Web 3.0 Definitions beyond Semantics
It is almost time for a paradigm-shift, where marketing and ad-agencies are growing more and more dependent upon web-development agencies. Their clients are asking for interactive campaigns including viral-marketing and desktop-widgets - not to mention social-networking!
TechCrunch wrote a reassuring article that outlines recent observations:
The top 100 advertisers in the U.S., who represent 41 percent of total advertising spending, shifted about $1 billion last year from TV and newspapers to the Web. An analysis from Ad Age shows that overall media spending in “measured” categories (TV, print, radio, Web) by the top 100 advertisers was flat in 2007, with 0.3 percent growth to $61.3 billion. But spending on Web display ads rose 33 percent to $4.2 billion.
Is this same surge in marketing dollars in anyway linked to O’Reilly’s observations in OpenSource paradigm shifts and the cloud-computing that supports the majority of companies providing Software as a Service…?
In essays like The Open Source Paradigm Shift and What is Web 2.0?, I argued that the success of the internet as a non-proprietary platform built largely on commodity open source software could lead to a new kind of proprietary lock-in in the cloud. What good are free and open source licenses, all based on the act of software distribution, when software is no longer distributed but merely performed on the global network stage? How can we preserve freedom to innovate when the competitive advantage of online players comes from massive databases created via user contribution, which literally get better the more people use them, raising seemingly insuperable barriers to new competition?
The “internet operating system” that I’m hoping to see evolve over the next few years will require developers to move away from thinking of their applications as endpoints, and more as re-usable components. For example, why does every application have to try to recreate its own social network? Shouldn’t social networking be a system service?
In short, we’re a long way from having all the answers, but we’re getting there. Despite all the possibilities for lock-in that we see with Web 2.0 and cloud computing, I believe that the benefits of openness and interoperability will eventually prevail, and we’ll see a system made up of cooperating programs that aren’t all owned by the same company, an internet platform, that, like Linux on the commodity PC architecture, is assembled from the work of thousands. Those who are skeptical of the idea of the internet operating system argue that we’re missing the kinds of control layers that characterize a true operating system.
It seems as though Marc Benoff (CEO of SalesForce.com) agrees:
For almost ten years now, we have been witnessing a decisive shift from client-server software to software as a service. Google, eBay, and Amazon.com established the value of multi-tenant internet applications in the consumer market, and salesforce.com, Google, and others have been proving that this same multi-tenant model is winning in the enterprise as well.
This shift to Web-based applications has generated two powerful waves so far. Now, we are seeing a third wave—one that we are calling Web 3.0—and it may prove to be the most significant and disruptive yet to the traditional software industry.
- Web 1.0: Anyone Can Transact
- Web 2.0: Anyone Can Participate
- Web 3.0: Anyone Can Innovate
One of our developers has a bumper sticker on his laptop that captures the spirit of Web 3.0 perfectly. It reads: “My other computer is a data center.” That’s a claim that any developer in the world can now make. And that’s the stuff of revolution.
As a comparison, there is always the view of Eric Schmidt to consider:
If you liked that article, perhaps you will also like these...?
AD8 Marketing & Advertising Blog Launched with 3D Graffiti
17.Aug.08 
World Wide Web 
Comments (0) 
