Chris - 19/06/06 - Web 2.0 - Having worked in the IT sector for over ten years, I have seen many acronyms and buzz words come and go - most created just so that one vendor or another can try to increase their sales and convince IT directors that the vendors products contain a "must have" technology that everyone else has and that they will be left behind if they don't buy. So it was initially with cynicism that I greeted articles about Web 2.0... but I have seen the light!

A bit slow you might say but then the realities of Web 2.0 were also a little slow in arriving as well.

However, we are now seeing the power and the possibilities opened up by new web techniques collectively dubbed "Web 2.0". There is not really any consensus on the exact definition of Web 2.0 but at its basic it is using techniques such as AJAX (sorry - another acronym) to create online applications with much more sophisticated interfaces and using the latest data exchange techniques such as Really Simple Syndication (RSS - yet another new acronym), XML and web services to seamlessly stitch together information from different sources. "Mash-ups" being the term used to describe sites that combine disparate information using these new techniques to create a new site and user experience.

Sophisticated online user interfaces enabled by Web 2.0 techniques are also starting to make online applications look and feel more like traditional PC applications, like Yahoo's latest e-mail service. Google has bought the online word application provider XYZ and even Microsoft is starting to make its PC applications at the very least more "web friendly" by utilising online information and services within them. This is just one factor pushing software consumption towards a pay-as-you-go or subscription model and I think things will continue to move in this direction.

Sophisticated Web 2.0 interfaces are starting to make online applications feel more like traditional PC applications.

But... how many web sites have you visited lately that have been downright disappointing? If many companies can't even get the basics right, how are they going to fare when others start using Web 2.0 techniques to make their sites slicker?

So I must cast off my cynicism and look forward to this new bright shiny web future with sophisticated online interfaces allowing browser based applications to match and surpass more traditional PC applications, further opening the web to cheaper and more mobile access devices. Eric Schmidt, CEO of Google, certainly sees the future here and sees the mobile phone as the future web access device of choice (see www.ft.com for further details), especially in 2nd and 3rd world countries where fixed line infrastructure is either unreliable or non-existent and where PCs are too expensive.

So Web 2.0 has the potential to open up many new possibilities and once again change the way we use the web, when and how and for what. But before we get too carried away...

How many web sites have you visited in the last week that have featured poor design, bad navigation, dead ends and have just been downright disappointing or frustrating to use? If many companies can't even get the basics right, how are they going to fare when others start using Web 2.0 techniques to make their sites slicker, more responsive, more interactive and just a provide a better user experience overall?

Maybe this will lead to a polarisation between the companies that understand the importance and potential of the web and who embrace and invest in their online strategy and those that continue to think of it as headache that they wish they didn't have to deal with.