Is LinkedIn Web 2.0?
I've noticed some debate on the usual LinkedIn Yahoo! Groups following the recent interview by Konstantin Guericke: LinkedIn : Web 2.0 moves beyond the "“read"” paradigm of Web 1.0 (see my previous post on this)
The question is, can LinkedIn be considered a Web 2.0 platform?
If we take Wikipedia's definition of Web 2.0 (and why not, as surely they're at the front of it) then I think LinkedIn, in its present form, only just make the grade at a stretch.
If "collaborate, and share information online" is at the heart of Web 2.0, then, sure, the platform and user experience is driven by how people interact with each other (just the same as any online networking platform). But, in terms of it's users shaping the experience in a more free-form way like MySpace, it's got some way to go.
Konstantin said in the interview, "Web 2.0 moves beyond the 'read' paradigm of Web 1.0 and to a more interactive Web where the overall experience is not controlled by a single Web site, but by the interplay of data sources from various Web sites and especially from data generated by users rather than by companies, such as information publishers."
Where's the "interplay of data sources from various Web sites" on LinkedIn. Have I missed something?
To me, I think that Ecademy remains the online business network platform that's closest to true Web 2.0. It incorporates blogs, tags, full HTML profiles, full access to non members through Google, etc.
Of course, the concept of Web 2.0 can mean that the company that started the platform loses control as it's users shape it in the direction that they want.
Based on past experience, that really doesn't sound like something LinkedIn will want. And of course, it doesn't mean it's something that the vast majority of it's users want either.
Is LinkedIn Web 2.0? In my opinion, not yet. But that's not necessarily a bad thing.
Technorati Tags - Online Networking, LinkedIn, Ecademy, Web 2.0
The question is, can LinkedIn be considered a Web 2.0 platform?
If we take Wikipedia's definition of Web 2.0 (and why not, as surely they're at the front of it) then I think LinkedIn, in its present form, only just make the grade at a stretch.
If "collaborate, and share information online" is at the heart of Web 2.0, then, sure, the platform and user experience is driven by how people interact with each other (just the same as any online networking platform). But, in terms of it's users shaping the experience in a more free-form way like MySpace, it's got some way to go.
Konstantin said in the interview, "Web 2.0 moves beyond the 'read' paradigm of Web 1.0 and to a more interactive Web where the overall experience is not controlled by a single Web site, but by the interplay of data sources from various Web sites and especially from data generated by users rather than by companies, such as information publishers."
Where's the "interplay of data sources from various Web sites" on LinkedIn. Have I missed something?
To me, I think that Ecademy remains the online business network platform that's closest to true Web 2.0. It incorporates blogs, tags, full HTML profiles, full access to non members through Google, etc.
Of course, the concept of Web 2.0 can mean that the company that started the platform loses control as it's users shape it in the direction that they want.
Based on past experience, that really doesn't sound like something LinkedIn will want. And of course, it doesn't mean it's something that the vast majority of it's users want either.
Is LinkedIn Web 2.0? In my opinion, not yet. But that's not necessarily a bad thing.
Technorati Tags - Online Networking, LinkedIn, Ecademy, Web 2.0
posted by David Regler at
11:42 am
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home