9rules Web 2.0?
Mike sent me an IM last night to an article he wrote about 9rules not being on the Web 2.0 collage. I agree with Mike’s reasoning and it seems our leaf will be added for version 2 of the collage.
If you read my blog(s) you know I’m not into gimmicks. I had a blog before they were called blogs but the term “blog” is just a catchy term for website. Web 2.0 is the buzzword of the moment for web innovation. If a truly innovative company was focused on innovating and not the buzzword of the moment, what they were working on would be 2.5, 3.0 or higher, right? A truly innovative company would not want to be labeled as right now because tomorrow is what they are focusing on.
Leaders are focused on tomorrow. Followers are focused on yesterday and today. Everyone isn’t meant to be a leader and being a follower isn’t a bad thing. Someone has to use the products and services the leaders create, right? By creating the innovation the leaders have formed a foundation for the followers to build upon. While the followers are building upon what the leaders created, the leaders are off and running on something new. It’s the formula for innovation.
Back to the collage. I’m sure there are a lot of companies wondering why they aren’t on the collage. When I see the next version what will I be looking for? If any companies were removed.
What do I think about 9rules not being on the collage initially? Relief. See, my vision for 9rules (great way for Mike, Scrivs and Colin to find out what that is, huh?) is for 9rules to be so innovative in our contribution to the internet we’d have to be talking about Web 5.0 not Web 2.0. If we are truly being innovative we won’t be able to be formally defined…and that’s where we come back to Mike’s reasoning: no one knows what 9rules is and we puzzle people. 9rules can’t really be defined can we? A blog network…wait no…a community, um…no…Web 2.0, hmm, not exactly. One word doesn’t really describe 9rules does it? I hope we don’t get caught up in the buzzwords of the moment and focus on innovation - not labeling what we are doing or trying to fit into a mold. The blunt truth - the end user doesn’t care what the name of it is, they simply want to use it.
So yeah, 9rules will eventually be on the collage but I want my readers to know I don’t give a damn about that. What I care about is that you’re enjoying the content from 9rules members and the members are happy. That you enjoy interacting with the 9rules team. That you realize that although the 9rules team has fun we intend to make a decent contribution to the internet. Most important - this member of the 9rules team doesn’t get caught up in the hype (can’t speak for the others but in my opinion - they don’t either).
Congrats to the person that made the collage though. It’s nice eye-candy and I am sure that some of the companies on there took satisifaction for being recognized for their contributions to the internet and it’s a nice way to document the companies that contributed to the current innovation.
**These are my views, not Mike, Colin’s or Scrivs. They have their own views. Wanna know what they are? You should ask them…they don’t bite.**
Related posts:
Denise Says:
I learned what Web 2.0. I’m glad someone realizes readers don’t care about that.
I read an article that Web 2.0 was a term someone thought up so conference holders could sell more tickets. I believe it.
Posted on February 7th, 2006 at 11:29 am
Felix J. Says:
I didn’t know anything about 9rules until I started reading your blog. The more I read the more I’m digging the company.
Companies that get caught up in the hype eventually get full of themselves. I’m glad as a member on the 9rules group you aren’t like that. It seems like if the guys get full of themselves you’ll try to fight it.
Grounded and innovative, I like that.
Posted on February 7th, 2006 at 11:43 am
Melvin W. Says:
Am I the only one that hates the word Web 2.0? Not only do not understand it but all these companies that branded themselves as 2.0 what happens when some genius decides it’s time for 3.0 because 2.0 has been played out?
I view Web 2.0 companies as temporary.
Posted on February 7th, 2006 at 12:04 pm
Aaron Says:
My boss is saying we need to get more 2.0. WTF?
I read the same thing Denise spoke of and it turned me off on anything Web 2.0, 3.99 or anything else.
Felix, I came across 9rules from some other site, forgot about it, then read Tyme’s stuff here. Scrivs seemed like a dork when I first read about him. I was surprised how cool he and the others are.
Posted on February 7th, 2006 at 4:19 pm
Mike Rundle Says:
Melvin, I totally agree. The term is basically cheap marketing lipstick for companies who may not have a 100% business plan, but definitely have a 100% buzzword marketing agenda
Aaron, that’s basically the sentiment for lots of people (not the Paul being a dork part!) but the part about “forgetting” about 9rules and then learning about it from somewhere else. We have an extremely diverse set of users at 9rules.com and across our Network, so people who see the 9r logo on one site might see it on another site a month later and put two and two together, or not. But if you keep seeing it day in and day out, then maybe you’ll click on through to the other side.
Posted on February 7th, 2006 at 5:12 pm
Chris W. Says:
“9rules can?t really be defined can we? A blog network…wait no…a community, um…no…Web 2.0, hmm, not exactly.”
That cracked me up.
Nice comparison between leaders and followers. The innovators are innovating. They probably don’t care about being labeled.
Maybe I don’t understand Web 2.0 but isn’t it for web applications? If it is why would 9rules qualify?
Posted on February 7th, 2006 at 6:53 pm
Tyme Says:
Chris here ya go: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_2.0
Read the origin of the term - and you’ll see why I am not a fan of it.
Posted on February 7th, 2006 at 8:34 pm
James G. Says:
I immediately distrust any company that screams web 2.0. I doubt the people making the technology are fretting over what to call themselves.
Like Aaron my inital opinon of Scrivens was different. I did not think he was a dork but I did not like the guy. Reading his stuff on Not 2 Geeky changed my position. He’s funny and actually likeable. I subscribed to some of the sites in the network and recommended a couple of things he said here to friends.
Posted on February 8th, 2006 at 12:55 am
Tyme Says:
Aaron and James, you bring up a point I’ve been meaning to discuss for a while so look for a podcast/entry about it.
Posted on February 8th, 2006 at 12:34 pm
Scrivs Says:
Aaron/James: I’m not really all that surprised. I get people telling me they read me so many different ways that it’s just too easy to make assumptions about an individual online. Hang out with me offline and that’s where the real fun begins.
Posted on February 8th, 2006 at 1:46 pm
Tyme Says:
I made a post on my thoughts about perception and influence through blogs. James and Aaron thank you for making your comments because it reminded me to revisit it.
And yes there is a podcast.
And no I did not sigh/moan. That’s for another day.
Posted on February 8th, 2006 at 2:42 pm