Chet Haase's Blog

Web Too? Oh.

I have been trying for some time to divine the true meaning of the phrase "Web 2.0".

I finally get it.

It's all just a big misunderstanding over pronunciation. Sure, it looks like you're supposed to say "Web Two-Dot-Oh" when it's written down. But it's actually just a chat-speak way of writing the phrase "Web too", as in:

"Web applications can finally do some things that Java applications have been able to do all along too"

• Local validation? Check.
• Client-server interaction? Check.
• Improvements over traditional HTML GUIs? Check.
• More interactive browser applications? Check.

Of course there are plenty of things they haven't gotten to yet, like offline usage, runtime performance, development tools, ...

Maybe they're saving that stuff for "Web Free"

Comments

• Actually Web 2.0 has little to do with AJAX ;) ... you still don't get it ... few people apparently have.

  Posted by: bonefry on March 16, 2006 at 04:52 PM

• Web 2.0 actually means building web-based [photo/social/map/social/crappy office suite/social/photo] applications with bright colors, modern themes and plenty of gradients.

  I can't say I dislike it :)

  Posted by: gfx on March 16, 2006 at 05:30 PM

• Chet, as someone who recognizes this similarity and works at sun, you are in a rare position to fix this disparity between Web 2.0 and Java. Most ajax developers would love to be able to embed hidden applets in their web 2.0 sites, which installed easily (like flash) and loaded instantly (instead of locking up the browser for 10 seconds). It's impossible now because JVM installation sucks, and loading applets sucks.

  Hopefully now that you recognize this, you can lead this change at sun.

  Posted by: keithkml on March 16, 2006 at 06:10 PM

• Here are some "random thoughts" on this subject:

  ease of development - you don't have to be a (j)rocket scientist to make something interesting. There are a lot of JavaScript/HTML hackers and designers out there... WIthin hours of GoogleMap releases, those hackers found really interesting ways to use that technology (I enjoy Frappr and Zillow)... GoogleAds are everywhere these days because they're so damn easy to add to a page...

  I can see it my way - you get to control your data, not how I see it... You know about GreaseMonkey (the Firefox plugin), right? Try doing that in Swing or SWT...

  Leverage the network - "The network is the computer"... :) It doesn't really matter if you see the information in a Java based Rich-app or a browser. Just look at http://www.blogbridge.com/ (a Java RSS reader) and http://www.live.com - Microsoft can now deliver their services faster

  Forget the software release cycle... Flickr pushes updates to their site upto every 30 minutes. They can selectively deliver new functionality to a small population to see if the changes "click" with the users. I've never done that with any of my applications... have you?

  Like Keith implied, Java can do it... It just hasn't delivered as well on the client side yet. Sure, there are some awsome Swing and SWT distributed apps... Sure, Romain Guy (gfx) can do awsome things with Swing.... but not as quickly as those JavaScript hackers.

  Posted by: sduskis on March 16, 2006 at 07:55 PM

• Another vote for all (or at least most) of the previous comments. Java was better years ago in many ways. So find out why it didn't work and fix it. And my comment is in reference to the DHTML/AJAX issue. But bonefry and gfx are right that "Web 2.0", whether I like that term or not, has a lot more to do with social software, microformats, tagging, and such like. But I guess it gets all mixed together. A vague catchy phrase is bound to have a vague meaning.
  

  Posted by: tjpalmer on March 17, 2006 at 10:34 AM

• I absolutely agree with keithkml. The JRE start up user experience is still fairly ugly, slow and disruptive. I think it's the major reason why we hardly see applets on web pages anymore.
  It's such a pity because once started up the experience can be far superior to 'web 2.0' which are still struggling with thngs like drag and drop.

  Also Java looks pretty ugly by default. Compare Java's latest LAF, Ocean, with Aeroglass, OSX or even XP and you'll see a world of difference.
  Again it's a real pity because Swing can look really great (Substance, JGoodies Looks).

  First impressions count.

  Posted by: keilly on March 17, 2006 at 11:02 AM

• The core of Web 2.0 is a religion not technology. The devotees want to believe. They want to believe in something new, something which makes their life better, or at least different, and which makes them rich.They want that it works this time, that it won't be a bubble.

  Since it is a religion one can't rationalize with the followers. All one can do it to sit back and watch how the thing blows up. Watch how the venture capital is burned up again, watch the dazzlers lying, the soldier of fortune betting the farm on it. Watch the PR bimbos running wild about social software.

  It will pass. Some day the bubble will burst. The dazzlers will move on, shouting a new buzzword.

  Posted by: ewin on March 17, 2006 at 03:07 PM

• Have you read the article in which Tim O'Reilly defines Web 2.0?

  Posted by: sduskis on March 19, 2006 at 04:40 AM

• Romain is doing a great job of highlighting the strengths of Java on the destkop. This entry doesn't really do that...

  IMHO, there is a huge potential for Rich Java apps in "Web 2.0" that hasn't materialized.

  Here is what I personally would love to see:

  Highlight the Java Desktop strengths you mention (offline usage, runtime performance, development tools) in future blog entries. (Offline usage implies that there is "online usage" as well...)

  Show how existing Rich Java Applications use the strengths you mention... Email clients (if any exist), RSS readers (including Blog readers), P2P applications.

  Reach out to the EE guys... IMHO, the combiniation of Web technologies and the Java JavaDesktop would be eye-popping.

  Romain Guy's blog is consistently in the top 3 jroller blogs. We want to believe.

  Posted by: sduskis on March 19, 2006 at 05:00 AM

• Web 2.0 is a philosophy, not a religion:

  "Web 2.0 is primarily interesting from a philosophical standpoint. It's about relinquishing control, it's about openness, it's about trust and authenticity. APIs, Tags, Ajax, mashups, and all that are symptoms, outputs, results of this philosophical bent."

  
  

  Posted by: sduskis on March 19, 2006 at 07:36 AM

• There is no Web 2.0 Bubble... A bubble implies unrealistic financial expectations.

  A Web 2.0 Company would do the following:

  deliver micro-content
  leverage social networking
  market to the long tail ("each out to the entire web, to the edges and not just the center, to the long tail and not just the head.")
  deliver a rich user experience
  leverage software above the level of a single device
  are backed by a specialized databases

  Here's a list of companies that I would consider Web 2.0 companies:

  GOOG: Market Cap: 100.42B, Net Income 1.47B, Cash 8.03B
  AAPL: Market Cap: 54.87B, Net 1.61B, Cash 8.71B
  EBAY: Market Cap: 53.76B, Net 1.08B, Cash 2.09B
  AMZN: Market Cap: 15.01B, Net 333.00M, Cash 2.00B

  SUNW: Market Cap: 16.44B, Net income: -324.00M, Cash 2.45B...

  "Web 2.0" is doing something that unfortunately Sun has not been able to do for a while... making money.

  However... I still hold SUNW. I know you guys have some "Web 2.0" in you somewhere :). I keep track of the stuff that you, meaning the Rich-UI Java teams, are doing. You guys are doing some awe inspiring technical work. You could do wonders if you just had a little better marketing and angle on actually making money.
  

  Posted by: sduskis on March 19, 2006 at 12:04 PM

• You can check how Web 2.0 ready you are with this validator ;-)

  Posted by: bloid on March 20, 2006 at 01:54 AM

• After laughing and nodding at the post, I must say I was humbled by the replies. True - Swing is the bomb and a lot easier than a mountain of Javascript for fancy stuff and simple stuff. However keithkml is right. If we can just get applets to load in .5 seconds, Swing will win. However, that will take millions upgrading their JVMs to "Seal" or whatever the JRE is called that is shared and will start with the system or browser and stay there. The module JSR will help too. I hate to say it, but we are in a race and it will take a large and fast develpment and marketing effort. Three years later and I don't know one non-developer who knows about Java.com, except Brittany Spears, if she still remembers. Macromedia is, OTOH, well known.

  Posted by: michaelbushe on March 24, 2006 at 06:42 AM

• I want to help.

  I went to school wih fellow Sun Swing guys: Joshua Marinacci and Chris Campbbell. I did heavy duty Graphics stuff like creating OpenGL based Raytracers and Applet-based CLI-driven animation. You can Google my accomplishments. Just look for "Solomon Duskis".

  Professionally, I've been doing Enterprise work, splitting my time doing Web-based and Swing-based applications.

  I'm also a self-taught marketing guy ;)

  IMHO, I have some interesting ideas how to integrate both the technical ideas and marketing ideas found in the Java EE community. Please take a look at:

  http://www.jroller.com/page/Solomon?entry=rich_client_version_of_appfuse

  Which appearently was thought about by other EE guys earlier... look at the end of the following article:

  http://www.theserverside.com/talks/videos/MattRaible/interview.tss?bandwidth=dsl

  Please contact me if you're interested in furthering this duscussion...

  Posted by: sduskis on March 26, 2006 at 07:24 AM

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.