One difference between your 2005 site here and Scoble’s “2010 blog” (and please don’t belittle him with “Bobby”, stick to the argument)…is the comment system. See how I had to register for a user account to join your walled garden – Scoble’s is more accessible, i.e. I can comment in near real-time. Anyone can join the conversation instantly.

I think I’ll go with Scoble on this.

john c welch
angrymacbastards.com

My definition of Web 3.0 is actually based on time. It’s a decade. Specifically the 10 year period starting in March of 2009 and ending in March of 2019. This is because the first decade of the Web began in March of 1989 when Tim Berners-Lee published his first Web proposal to CERN. Thus Web 1.0 was the first decade, 1989 – 1999, 2.0 was the second, 1999 – 2009, and now 3.0 has begun.

The only sensible, objective, non-contentious way to define these indices is time. That way we avoid the problem of everyone declaring a new version number every month. These numbers should stand for 10 year spans of time.

Web 4.0 would then start in March of 2019.

This makes sense and also gives the credit where credit is due: Tim Berners-Lee.

As for the value of this way of looking at technology trends, broadly speaking there have been a number of cyclical patterns in these 10 year blocks. Web 1.0 was focused on the core technology infrastructure of the Web. Web 2.0 — the second decade — was focused on the user-experience and the social layer. Web 3.0 will be an upgrade of the data layer (the semantic web, new search technologies, etc.) and a shift towards real-time search and what some of us are calling “The Stream” versus the Web. The Stream is focused on Now versus the past and requires real-time indexing and metrics. Twitter is the best example of the Stream, although Facebook is another.

Web 4.0 will shift to augmented reality, ubiquity (the web embedded in everything), the Internet of Things, and intelligent agents (a distributed, decentralized service layer) — what might be called “The WebOS”.

I write about all this on my blog at http://mindingtheplanet.net

Enjoy!

By the way, thanks for supporting the idea that Web 3.0 is a legitimate topic. Now if we can only convince the Wikipedia to Un-Delete the Web 3.0 page which I and others wrote last year. There has been an ongoing wikiwar over this term. I don’t see why Web 2.0 deserves a page but Web 3.0 does not. Makes no sense. Wikipedians take note. Kara and Walt are another proof point that this term is legit.

I admire much of what you and Walt do, including the D conference. I also admire the work of Robert Scoble.

There are at least two reasons I don’t find your “translation” compelling.

For one, it is not clear from your lengthly text that you understand the point Scoble is making.

Secondly, it is the kind of response I would expect from a juvenile – not a seasoned veteran of web culture.

Michael, FWIW, I’ve known Robert since the early ’90s. I have a feeling he won’t think this to be too harsh. It will just make him firm up his thoughts on 2010 even more.

And btw, can you pls add twitter and friendfeed to the “sharing” capability at the end of the column.
thanks
mimetz