Has the term “web 2.0 design died yet? If not, I can’t wait till that day finally comes. As a full-time web designer, I can’t tell you how the overuse of this word completely makes my skin crawl.
Why? because the people who use it have no idea what they are talking about. At all. Every time I start a new project I constantly hear the question “Can you design me a web 2.0 looking website?”. Typically my response is, what does that look like? Because I honestly have no idea. They always explain it as bright colors with big, shiny, rounded edge buttons.
Well then, what is web 2.0?
Wikipedia explains the web 2.0 design phenomenon as:
The term Web 2.0 is commonly associated with web applications that facilitate interactive information sharing, interoperability, user-centered design, and collaboration on the World Wide Web. A Web 2.0 site gives its users the free choice to interact or collaborate with each other in a social media dialogue as creators (prosumer) of user-generated content in a virtual community, in contrast to websites where users (consumer) are limited to the passive viewing of content that was created for them. Examples of Web 2.0 include social-networking sites, blogs, wikis, video-sharing sites, hosted services, web applications, mashups and folksonomies.
The term is closely associated with Tim O’Reilly because of the O’Reilly Media Web 2.0 conference in 2004. Although the term suggests a new version of the World Wide Web, it does not refer to an update to any technical specifications, but rather to cumulative changes in the ways software developers and end-users use the Web.
So where in that definition does it say anything about bright colors and big, shiny, rounded edge buttons? I’ll wait.
Yeah, it doesn’t. Web 2.0 is a simple technical term that has been morphed into something that is ridiculous and just plain old stupid.
On my journey to figure out what this term actually meant I found a few websites which referred to a web 2.0 design layout as:
- large text
- strong navigation
- powerful logo
- gradient, shadows and glossy graphics
- bright cherry color palettes
- big juicy icons
But what this sounds like to me is standard web design. There’s nothing web 2.0 about it.
Do you have any web 2.0 design examples?
Well I’m not sure, I don’t know what a web 2.0 design layout actually looks like, but I know how a nicely designed website looks. Web designers, who have been designing since the internet boom don’t conform to these types of labels. Either you’re a good designer or you aren’t.
But I have tried to compile a few ideas of what people think web 2.0 designs look like.
Ok Arsha, these designs don’t look bad to me?
You’re absolutely correct. I don’t have a problem with any of these designs, it’s the term web 2.0 design, I can’t stand. The majority of the people who use it, have no idea what they’re talking about. I just wish the term would die a slow painful death.
That’s all. Rant over.
*Disclaimer: Don’t take this post too seriously folks**