leihu home

Barack Obama Logo FIT OneLotus Creative

February 23, 2006

Web Two Point Oh No!

imagined by: James Mathias

There’s a new way to create and market web-sites and no one told me about it. I didn’t get my invitation to the private beta release party. No one told me that we would be taking old methods and technologies, placing new names on them or groups of them and touting them as brand new. Someone failed to mention that certain design elements were now part of this new and improved web. I suppose the memo never reached my desk.

I’m already tired of Web 2.0, not because of its absolute and powerful inundation into every nook and cranny on the web. Not because some of its components infuriate me as a accessibility supporter. Not even because it’s another trend or catch-phrase or buzz-word.

I’m tired of Web 2.0 because it’s all old. It’s all been done; it’s all been around for years, none of it’s new. No real advances, in fact some of it feels like a step backwards.

Ajax? This is just JavaScript and xml working together, not new; only the word Ajax is new. Seemingly overnight, you’re not a decent web or software developer if your web-app doesn’t include a massive amount of sloppy Ajax features.

There’s a ton of arguments for and against Ajax, I’m not going to rehash those. My main issue with it, is that it’s sloppy, it’s not standardized, its functions are often easier or more efficiently accomplished using another proven “old-school” method.

In almost every case Ajax is used to apply an “ooh cool” factor to a product or project. This is the absolute wrong reason to use Ajax. We’re not making desktop applications, we’re making web applications, and with that comes an unstable, non-standardized environment and absolute, constant and relative variables. The web should not work like a desktop app.

How about companies with numerals in their name, is this new, I don’t think so. As a matter of fact 1lotus.com was around before Web 2.0 was a glimmer in a marketing person’s eye. What about 2advanced, shiver7 anyone. The point; It’s yet another old trend being related with the new package.

Rounded corners, mailing lists, invites, glossy, big graphics? These are all old and now renewed; they all fall under the moniker Web 2.0. Why?

Why do we need to label the internet, why are we pushing an idea of renewed technologies in shiny wrappers, are we running out of actual new ideas?

I have an idea, let’s stop labeling things and stop being cliquish as a global community, let’s band together and let’s find a way out of Web 2.0 back into the real internet, where things are what they are, and not something they’re not. Which is new.

More of the Same

10 recent “Developmentally Able”

jump to top ↑

©2001–2009 · change log · contact

Think. Change.

XFN Friendly

hung, orgyen yul-kyi nup-chang tsham
pema kesar dong-po la
ya-tshen ch’og-ki ngodrup nyey
pema jugne zhey-su trag
khortu khadro mangpo kor
khyed-kyi jeysu dag-drub kyee
chin-kyee lab-ch’ir shegsu sol

guru pedma siddhi hung

your comments

8 comments



You know the score, keep it clean and on topic. “Spammers” & “trolls” are decimated on sight.

 

Feb. 23, 2006 (4:17pm) [#1]

Dagobert Renouf alias Gali

great article, i agree.

Web must keep the difference with other desktop apps, it’s not just an extended browsing, it’s a way to see the world differently, a freedom place, wich can be accessed by everyone, web 2.0 and all of theses conciderations are accessibility and creativity killers.
The cool factor is definitly important so, even if it’s against accessibility rules (i was “ohhh its great” when i saw the first good scroling js effect and i had bought an ipod -_-) and the problem, if it is one, is that users love the “cool-factor”, and most of them don’t really care about creativity and accessibility (when they don’t encounter problems of course ^^)!
So what can we do to promote accessibility and creativity while web 2.0 is growing ? I think the best way is to show them a “web 2.0” site on the psp smile

Seriously, the creativity has always won against uniformity, (but once creativity had won, it becomes a new “standart” -_- and then the process start again) so i don’t fear the new regressive “web 2.0”, because i think creative people will continue upgrading the web value.

Why is this called Web 2.0 ? Five years ago when accessibility css standarts weren’t used so much, was it web 0.5 ?

p.s : hi james, the second article i comment and the second i’m agreeing with you, accessibility will win !
sorry for posting this big comment ^^

Feb. 23, 2006 (7:09pm) [#2]

James Mathias

Hello again Dagobert,

Glad you’re enjoying my articles. I appreciate every comment.

I really think that the global web development community needs to move away from cliques and labels and towards unity and support of one another, not just our buddies, but everyone.

Feb. 25, 2006 (6:49pm) [#3]

Paul

I’ve been tempted to comment on your blog’s for a while now, just havnt had time.

I love your work, but lately it seems like you are trying to put your foot down on your own idea’s, and not accept anyone elses as acceptable.

Just like your previous posts about the forum layouts. To me, this seems to contradict pretty much every forum design you have producted to date. Many of your previous designs have featured graphic intense headers, fancy post layouts, etc. I would go on, but its pointless.

On the subject of Ajax. No, the technologies that are being used are not new to the industry. But none the less, the products that Ajax methods are producing are new to the industry.

Yes, many of them are flashy. This is bad how? What is wrong with a web application acting like a desktop application. When you can access software from the web, i.e. globally, instead of on a single PC.

My company are currently developing an internal system for a local company. The problem the company has faced before is they have used desktop based programs. Now with the framework of the new web system, they have seen increased productivity, easier management, and a great deal of time saved with general administration between physical locations.

I could go on for longer, but I wont. I will stop with one question though.

Why do you feel it is your way or the highway, and refuse to accept methods that many others use?

Feb. 25, 2006 (8:44pm) [#4]

James Mathias

Hi Paul,

I apologize if I come off that way, it’s not my intention.

I do not feel it’s my way of the highway, I’m only writing articles from my own point of view, using personal opinions on web development, you are free to agree or disagree.

As for the AoF series matching my client work; you find me a client that will give me total, 100%, non-questioning control over a project and I’ll introduce you to myself. Client work is not about pressing or forcing your ideas/ideals on someone else, it’s about taking the client needs/wishes and turning them into a work of art you can both be proud of.

The AoF series is about changing the face of modern forums, not about discussing my client projects, my ideas and concepts for the series are my personal, “best case” scenario for the GUI of the proverbial, ideal forum software. These concepts are based on large professional and personal experiences in the field.

Web software should not behave like a desktop applications for many reasons the least of which is the fact that they are accessed from highly variable environments, they need to be more adaptable than desktop apps.

My opinions in this article stand, it has nothing to do with how people use the technologies or don’t, and in no way was it a personal attack at anyone specific, it was a general commentary on the current state of web-design and development.

I’m not the first nor will I be the last developer to write one.

Ultimately, the web is about ideas and opinions, if I didn’t have any of my own there would be no reason for me to be here.

@Stefan,

Comment threads are not the place to ask for html support, thank you.

Mar. 01, 2006 (4:25pm) [#5]

Mark (mdz61384)

“Client work is not about pressing or forcing your ideas/ideals on someone else, it’s about taking the client needs/wishes and turning them into a work of art you can both be proud of.”

Beautiful James. I never would have expected this from you several years ago.

You have become quite the web professional.

And I agree. I’d also like to mention that it seems the Web2.0/Javascript/AJAX learning curve is unusually high. I sat here with frameworks and prototypes (prototype/scriptaculous/jsquery…blah blah blah) today at work and then promptly went back to my php and xhtml ways of doing things.

a little bit of panache is a good thing. (look at SIFR integration with xml). a lot is not. thats what I think of the “new” web.

a further question to ask that may not be answered…are we “used” to doing things on the web in a certain manner because they have been always difficult to do? look at cross-browser compatibility, making things from scratch. even if you are good at these, on some level they are an enormous chore. should the web be over-simplified (look at the frameworks branching out all over the place)? Is this taking valid work away from something most of us have customaritly put enormous amounts of time and effort into to solve? Is that the web? Or is the web becoming just another cheaper development environment in which to write desktop applications? Sometime when I’m not busy…I’ll cover this myself…

Mar. 05, 2006 (10:42pm) [#6]

Erin

I actually like “AJAX”. Like Matt said on one of his blog posts about a username that’s already been taken, why should a user be subjected to resubmitting all the same information just because one field is incorrect?

I agree that AJAX will take a bit of getting used to (it’s kind of like Flash in that it requires its own set of rules), but the concept is here to stay.

Mar. 06, 2006 (9:00am) [#7]

Sebastian mares

I disagree with most of what you said. In my eyes, you seem to do dislike what is called Web 2.0 and AJAX just because the people use it unwisely. It’s like blaming Flash and Macromedia because a lot of kids have crappy animated pages or like blaming the inventor of the television for the bad program. I think that if AJAX is used in the right way and when it its appropriate, it is a great thing. And wasn’t there a huge hype when JavaScript was introduced in the 90s? I think this is something natural and you are going to see it happening over and over again. It’s true that all the technologies are old, but isn’t it great what you can do when you combine them?

Also, your posts about the perfect forum layout - I totally agree with Paul saying that with your last posts you are actually saying that your designs were suboptimal. I am a fan of simplcity and don’t like pages that are full of graphics and stuff, but what you showed is simply too plain and no matter how simple it is, it’s not eye-catching at all. And if a website is not eye-catching, chances are good that your visitors are not going to stay there for long.

Mar. 06, 2006 (10:09am) [#8]

James Mathias

@Erin, and Sebastian,

You’re both entitled to your opinions on AJAX, that was not the real point of the article. The article is mainly about banding together, discontinuing cliques and labels and working together as a community to move things forward, instead of rehashing old technologies, which I feel is a step backwards or at the very least no step at all.

I think if you take a step back and look at AJAX objectively–without the “oh cool” factor–you’ll see that it’s not the best solution for 95% of the problems it is currently solving. I’m in the minority here, and I understand that, and I don’t have a problem with it.

@Sebastian,

Yes I am saying that most forum designs, including my own are sub-optimal. It’s a fact. But, one I have no control over. I have to meet my clients needs first, my needs are secondary, but that doesn’t stop me from later voicing my opinions on my own work, or the work of others. As for the design being bland and “plain” and “not eye-catching”. Yes again you are correct, but the point of the articles are not the design, but the layout and optimization, which is easier to demonstrate with minimal styles.

In the end it is not up to the software developer to make your site eye-catching or beautiful, that is the job of the designer. Modern re-usable software packages should be bare bones, they should not have an advanced look and feel of their own, especially when it means more work for the end-user or web-master. Again just my opinion.

add comment

8 comments