Comments on: An Enterprise 2.0 Definition http://www.infovark.com/2008/01/16/an-enterprise-20-definition/ Digging the world of Enterprise 2.0 Sun, 06 Jul 2008 21:22:02 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: Gordon http://www.infovark.com/2008/01/16/an-enterprise-20-definition/#comment-72 Gordon Thu, 24 Jan 2008 15:57:06 +0000 http://www.infovark.com/2008/01/16/an-enterprise-20-definition/#comment-72 Hey Ben! It's definitely all about the user - customization and responsiveness are all much more "2.0". re web 3.0 lol - hopefully you can turn that vision into one we can all play with! Oh - we're both monitoring the one corporate twitter account - but you can find our individual twitterings at http://twitter.com/goodgord and http://twitter.com/dthrasher Hey Ben!

It’s definitely all about the user - customization and responsiveness are all much more “2.0″.

re web 3.0 lol - hopefully you can turn that vision into one we can all play with!

Oh - we’re both monitoring the one corporate twitter account - but you can find our individual twitterings at http://twitter.com/goodgord and http://twitter.com/dthrasher

]]> By: Ben Tremblay http://www.infovark.com/2008/01/16/an-enterprise-20-definition/#comment-71 Ben Tremblay Thu, 24 Jan 2008 06:03:40 +0000 http://www.infovark.com/2008/01/16/an-enterprise-20-definition/#comment-71 Off the top of my head, I'd say the 2 in both Enterprise and Web signify a change in the fundamental nature of the transaction. Web1.0 sites, even the really good ones, are basically brochures. A typical blogspot blog, say. But user participation is more than just "user generated" ... blog comments are user-generated comments, and nobody was calling blogspot Web2.0. (Actually I find it so clunky I wouldn't call it Web1.0 ... especially since google took over. And I've been using it since '02) For my money, a couple of things typify "2" ... I mean paradigmatically. First is getting new contents w/o refreshing the whole page. You get /almost/ the same effect with a fast PC and broadband, but know what? It isn't. (Less than .8 seconds seems instantaneous. 1.2 seconds doesn't. CogPsych 101.) The other, for my money, is user customization. Cookies was the first step, but that's old hat. I mean clicking /this/ for a different font, clicking /that/ to change the color-scheme. Heck, click and have the sidebar flip over to the other margin. Or what the heck, drag and whole page design around. And then have the system re-call and re-establish those setting when I come back ... *Golly, gee, Ma, this machine is validating my humanity!* That's the key: user experience ... something like what the consummer electronics gurus in Japan (Oh-wooops, sensei, not guru, my bad.) called "pride of ownership". It's visceral. The stuff I've been beetling away at for the past 4 years? Tonight I found one credible site that depicts at as Web3.0 ... I guess that's why nobody understands WTF I'm going on about. heh --bentrem http://bentrem.sycks.net/gnodal/ p.s. do you both share the 1 Twitter account? Off the top of my head, I’d say the 2 in both Enterprise and Web signify a change in the fundamental nature of the transaction. Web1.0 sites, even the really good ones, are basically brochures. A typical blogspot blog, say.

But user participation is more than just “user generated” … blog comments are user-generated comments, and nobody was calling blogspot Web2.0. (Actually I find it so clunky I wouldn’t call it Web1.0 … especially since google took over. And I’ve been using it since ‘02)
For my money, a couple of things typify “2″ … I mean paradigmatically. First is getting new contents w/o refreshing the whole page. You get /almost/ the same effect with a fast PC and broadband, but know what? It isn’t. (Less than .8 seconds seems instantaneous. 1.2 seconds doesn’t. CogPsych 101.) The other, for my money, is user customization. Cookies was the first step, but that’s old hat. I mean clicking /this/ for a different font, clicking /that/ to change the color-scheme. Heck, click and have the sidebar flip over to the other margin. Or what the heck, drag and whole page design around. And then have the system re-call and re-establish those setting when I come back … *Golly, gee, Ma, this machine is validating my humanity!* That’s the key: user experience … something like what the consummer electronics gurus in Japan (Oh-wooops, sensei, not guru, my bad.) called “pride of ownership”. It’s visceral.

The stuff I’ve been beetling away at for the past 4 years? Tonight I found one credible site that depicts at as Web3.0 … I guess that’s why nobody understands WTF I’m going on about.
heh

–bentrem
http://bentrem.sycks.net/gnodal/

p.s. do you both share the 1 Twitter account?

]]> By: Collaboration: You’re soaking in it « infovark http://www.infovark.com/2008/01/16/an-enterprise-20-definition/#comment-62 Collaboration: You’re soaking in it « infovark Fri, 18 Jan 2008 15:53:26 +0000 http://www.infovark.com/2008/01/16/an-enterprise-20-definition/#comment-62 [...] we’re defining our terms, let’s think about the word “collaborate” for a moment. For the etymology buffs, [...] [...] we’re defining our terms, let’s think about the word “collaborate” for a moment. For the etymology buffs, [...]

]]> By: Gordon http://www.infovark.com/2008/01/16/an-enterprise-20-definition/#comment-60 Gordon Thu, 17 Jan 2008 04:13:16 +0000 http://www.infovark.com/2008/01/16/an-enterprise-20-definition/#comment-60 Hey Jevon, Thanks for stopping by! Having carefully re-read your post, you are correct. I do indeed owe you an apology! Jevon doesn't imply or state that Enterprise 2.0 doesn't exist. Just that the Enterprise 2.0 Market doesn't exist. (It's the same Enterprise 1.0 Market we've all been selling to for years.) I do think that there's value in a common solution defintion. (Market defintions are for analysts and consultants and economists). Bringing web 2.0 technologies into the enterprise is an approach to solving common business problems - problems that themselves, haven't changed much. so Jevon - please accept my apology. Next time you're in DC - the drinks are on me! :) Hey Jevon,

Thanks for stopping by!

Having carefully re-read your post, you are correct.

I do indeed owe you an apology!

Jevon doesn’t imply or state that Enterprise 2.0 doesn’t exist. Just that the Enterprise 2.0 Market doesn’t exist. (It’s the same Enterprise 1.0 Market we’ve all been selling to for years.)

I do think that there’s value in a common solution defintion. (Market defintions are for analysts and consultants and economists). Bringing web 2.0 technologies into the enterprise is an approach to solving common business problems - problems that themselves, haven’t changed much.

so Jevon - please accept my apology. Next time you’re in DC - the drinks are on me! :)

]]> By: Jevon MacDonald http://www.infovark.com/2008/01/16/an-enterprise-20-definition/#comment-58 Jevon MacDonald Wed, 16 Jan 2008 23:31:05 +0000 http://www.infovark.com/2008/01/16/an-enterprise-20-definition/#comment-58 Gordon, you obviously did not read my post very carefully, because I did not say that Enterprise 2.0 does not exist nor did I imply it. I also did not say that businesspeople have not spent money trying to improve their organizations. Quite the opposite. Gordon, you obviously did not read my post very carefully, because I did not say that Enterprise 2.0 does not exist nor did I imply it.

I also did not say that businesspeople have not spent money trying to improve their organizations. Quite the opposite.

]]>