1.0 was mostly static web pages with content changes largely driven by manual page updates to static web resources. This was the era where most sites were powered by an httpd host.
2.0 was when databases and ajax (JavaScript async) started to take over as a web content delivery form. Often content delivery moved from semantic page navigation flows to "single page applications" where the client state was often held client side and pushed to the server when asking for new content.
3.0 is the marketing term for crypto based projects that are trying to sell "a brand new web" where there are no longer centralized services providing content, and somewhere it all gets glued together with crypto forgetting that most of the modern web users are running on cell phones with limited cpu and more importantly battery constraints. It's also part of a proud group of technologies that garnered a catchy marketing term to describe the movement before the practical implementations emerged (much unlike web 1.0, 2.0 before it).
I fully agree that 3.0 is the marketing term for decentralized cryptobro stuff, but isn't it also a term that tentatively belonged to a more generic idea of a regular web that iterates beyond web 2.0?
Right, that's what I mean. Of course it won't stop people, people who are evidently even less acquainted with the subject of than me before I asked my question, from giving confidently incorrect responses.
I don't believe that their version of the term web 3.0 really took off the way that the web 2.0 buzzword did, but I vaguely understand the term having a meaning independent of the meaning given to it by crypto enthusiasts.
Oh it definitely had a meaning before the crypto people started using it. When I think of Web3 I think of "never really got clearly defined, those semantic web guys got close" and then being used for crypto.
Wikipedia backs me up too[0].
> 08:27, 24 October 2006 Lumos3 talk contribs 18,470 bytes +36 Web 3 redirects here so should be shown as a synonym
So at the end of 06 Wikipedia was referring to semantic web already as Web 3. The first release of bitcoin wasn't until 09.
Web 1.0 is any website with the doctag <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//SoftQuad Software//DTD HoTMetaL PRO 6.0::19990601::extensions to HTML 4.0//EN">; it's frames based designs, table based layouts, blink tags and under construction gifs.
Web 2.0 is the transition from homepages and webmasters to content and platforms, users are producing the content and platform owners get rich off ads. It also coincides with the shift to AJAX and web applications that had logic in the front-end, but this isn't really part of the actual definition.
Web 3.0 was briefly the semantic web. It didn't really take off and was largely forgotten when the cryptobros relaunched the term. New Web 3 is all about using decentralization, blockchains and cryptocurrencies and NFTs to somehow solve the problems with Web 2.0.
Today it’s primarily a load of nonsense that cryptocurrency promoters use to make people want to buy tokens related to some useless website which has no users except the other token holders.
Back in 2005, “web 2.0” was a marketing term meant to indicate optimism that dynamic web applications could transcend the economic disappointments of the dot-com boom and bust. It was always nebulous and poorly defined, and the only reason we’re talking about “web 2.0” almost two decades later is the aforementioned crypto promoters.
The boundary is fuzzy, as others have pointed out. If there's one specific technology that serves as a definite boundary it's the use of XMLHttpRequest in javascript running on the browser, later dubbed "AJAX", which is short for Asynchronous JavaScript and XML.
It was first implemented (non-standard) around 2001 in Windows 2000, Outlook and IE 5. Subsequently other browsers (Mozilla in particular) adopted it and it became a def facto standard.
Not every site the uses/used Ajax is fully Web 2.0, but they are definitely not 1.0. The affect on web development was transformative, resulting in "DHTML", or Dynamic HTML. Webmail, for example, in the gmail, first released in 2004, you see a fully Web 2.0 site. You might say it's the beginning of what's called the Single Page Application. At a time when the average home internet connection was still pretty slow over dial-up, eliminating most round-trips was a game-changer.
As far as I understand, web 1.0 is browser makes a request -> backend delivers some html, with subsequent requests just for css/images/iframes. This also had a characteristic style with layouts made from tables and simple but busy designs. Web 2.0 is many of the web apps you see today, where you don’t need to load a page to fetch new content, but instead asynchronous JavaScript grabs it and edits the html — think gmail or Google maps. Web 3.0 is unclear to me, but it seems like most people who use it refer to decentralized or peer to peer applications and crypto.
I don't think there is, because even here there is disagreement about whether a web server that returns html and css without using NodeJS is 1.0 or 2.0.
