I've had the pleasure of chatting recently with Doc Searls. I say pleasure because I every time I talk with Doc, it seems that learn something new. In this case, I learned that I'm not the only one who does not like the name "Web 2.0" that we are using for a new generation of interactive, decentralized web-based services that promise to make the internet better for the users, if not for large companies.
We both think that Web 2.0 sounds way too much like a product upgrade, when in fact what is happening is more fundamental and much larger than a feature-enhancement.
I remember back in 2003 that I tried hard to avoid saying "blog" and "blogosphere." Both words seemed to me to be a bit comic book in their qualities. But by then it was too late. The two words waddled, had feathers and quacked. They were going to be called what they were being called.
Is it already too late to rename "Web 2.0?" Are Dc and I are the only ones still resistant to the term, which had been argued with some passion several months back? Is resistance futile?
If you have an idea for a better name, please leave it here as a comment. If I like your name better than Web 2.0, I'll argue the case and see what happens. maybe Doc will as well--but I'm in no position to speak for him.
