As usual with such things, I tend to go to extremes to make a point: “strong opinions, loosely held.” Clearly the nuanced arguments here help clarify the picture of where we are in the nomenclature of the web.

In reality, I think we all need to make the point that, whatever we call it, Web 2.0 is People. People in conversation, people in markets, people seeking themselves and each other in communities.

I have always viewed 2.0 as society’s second kick at the can. Where we failed in 1.0 with too many over-hyped offerings with little real added value; we as a society are now making up for it with rich, targeted applications that facilitate the sharing of information between people from all over the planet. Where we once thought the web was just another channel like the telephone, we now see it as its own economy where new and exciting business models can exist, not just extensions of brick and morter companies.

I think the separation needs to be clear and that it is imperative to educate those that don’t know that things are different now. The more we can separate ourselves from the poor user experiences and dot-bombs of the past, the better. As over-used as Web 2.0 is, it draws a very clean line in the sand, for both users and investors.

When do we retire it? When ever single person has heard it. I don’t think we are there yet. However, I would definitely stop pitching ideas for a “Web 2.0� company to VCs. Target your audience.

Sorry about the rant…

One candidate would be “Information Society”, as it could be argued that this 2.0 thing is just the next step in the ongoing evolution of the Information Society, aka post-industrial society, aka post-modern society, etc. The impact of computer technology and the Internet before 2.0 came along should not be forgotten.