What makes up web 2.0

Personal web pages were common, consisting mainly of static pages hosted on ISP-run web servers, or on free web hosting services. In Web 1. Also, in Web 1. It can be used as a personal website. It costs the user as per pages viewed. It has directories that enable users to retrieve a particular piece of information. Four design essentials of a Web 1. Frames and Tables are used to position and align the elements on a page.

Web 2. It does not refer to a modification to any technical specification, but to modify the way Web pages are designed and used. The transition is beneficial but it does not seem that when the changes occur. Full text search our database of , titles for Web 2.

Learn More About Web 2. Critical Perspectives on Social Justice in S There is very little discussion of socially just a In Stock. Exploring Online Learning Through Synchronou Exploring online learning through the lens of sync Handbook of Research on the Global Impacts a The world is witnessing a media revolution similar Study Abroad Opportunities for Community Col Community colleges serve more students than any ot Police Psychology and Its Growing Impact on Police psychology has become an integral part of p Handbook of Research on Competency-Based Edu The majority of adult learners are looking to atta Modern Societal Impacts of the Model Minorit Figure 1 shows a "meme map" of Web 2.

It's very much a work in progress, but shows the many ideas that radiate out from the Web 2. For example, at the first Web 2. The first of those principles was "The web as platform.

What's more, two of our initial Web 1. People don't often think of it as "web services", but in fact, ad serving was the first widely deployed web service, and the first widely deployed "mashup" to use another term that has gained currency of late. Every banner ad is served as a seamless cooperation between two websites, delivering an integrated page to a reader on yet another computer.

Akamai also treats the network as the platform, and at a deeper level of the stack, building a transparent caching and content delivery network that eases bandwidth congestion. Nonetheless, these pioneers provided useful contrasts because later entrants have taken their solution to the same problem even further, understanding something deeper about the nature of the new platform. Both DoubleClick and Akamai were Web 2. Let's drill down for a moment into each of these three cases, teasing out some of the essential elements of difference.

If Netscape was the standard bearer for Web 1. So let's start with a comparison of these two companies and their positioning. Netscape framed "the web as platform" in terms of the old software paradigm: their flagship product was the web browser, a desktop application, and their strategy was to use their dominance in the browser market to establish a market for high-priced server products.

Control over standards for displaying content and applications in the browser would, in theory, give Netscape the kind of market power enjoyed by Microsoft in the PC market. Much like the "horseless carriage" framed the automobile as an extension of the familiar, Netscape promoted a "webtop" to replace the desktop, and planned to populate that webtop with information updates and applets pushed to the webtop by information providers who would purchase Netscape servers.

In the end, both web browsers and web servers turned out to be commodities, and value moved "up the stack" to services delivered over the web platform. Google, by contrast, began its life as a native web application, never sold or packaged, but delivered as a service, with customers paying, directly or indirectly, for the use of that service. None of the trappings of the old software industry are present. No scheduled software releases, just continuous improvement.