Why Web 2.0 Kinda Sucks
Since mid August 2006 following the imaginary credit crunch Web 2.0 and other internet related stories have been dominating the headlines. There has been a huge surge in hype regarding social networking, facebook, google, web 2.0. and so on. Every week it seems there are crop of new headlines about another overpriced, noninclusive web 2.0 conference, facebook adding another billion or so in valuation, google stock rising another $100, a new google/youtube.facebook/myspace “killer” is launched, and so on.
Is this a repeat of the 1999-2000 tech euphoria? Maybe, but unlike the previous tech bubble there aren’t nearly as many opportunities for entrepreneurs, which is why Web 2.0 kinda sucks.
For one, it costs a lot more money and requires a lot more programing knowledge to create a dynamic user generated web 2.0 site than a more static web 1.0 site. You can’t just create a social network with an html/javasctip and php book. You would need to be proficient in the latest, most advanced programing languages such as ajax and so on in order to create the user platform required for a social network .
Second, there is too much competition for a new web 2.0 site to be able to generate much traction. Since late 2006 the rate of new social networking web 2.0 type sites being created has EXPLODED, and shows no signs of tapering off. Also, the largest social networking/ web 2.0 sites such as myspace, facebook, and youtube have an increasing growing percent of the total market share of social networking. It’s not that there are more web 2.0 sites to compete with, but that the biggest web 2.0 sites continue to extend their lead at an accelerating rate, which compounds the problem.
While web 2.0 has created many millionaires and some billionaires web 1.0 created many more, and with less work. judging by the admission prices of recent web 2.0 conferences just getting your foot in the door is a struggle, let alone creating a successful web 2.0 site that is able to compete with the current market leaders.
In conclusion, I don’t recommend building a web 2.0 site. Don’t waste your time and money. ignore the hype and focus on achieving more realistic goals than web 2.0 success. Maybe time travel or proving the Riemann hypothesis is a more feasible goal.
3 Responses to “Why Web 2.0 Kinda Sucks”
Pingback from iamned.com Blog » Social networking website valuations aren’t bubbly
Time November 19, 2007 at 5:42 pm
[...] I have written a few weeks ago how it is no longer viable to create a web 2.0 site due to market saturization. Since nearly all new web 2.0 websites are slated for failure according to my arguments, that will further enable the current web 2.0 leaders to keep growing and apreciating. My post “Why making money online generally sucks” also elaborates on this point. [...]
Pingback from iamned.com Blog » Myeeos: Will it succeed?
Time December 3, 2007 at 7:41 pm
[...] It is innevitabe that myeeos faces a long uphill battle ahead. In 2003-04 myeeos could easily become an overnight success like myspace and facebook, but times have changed. There are probably 1000’s of social networking sites- each one is vying for your attention, while in 2004 there were perhaps only a few such sites. Myspace and facebook dominte but there are many other smaller sites which are consuming marketshare; linkedin, bebo, taggworld, myyearbook and so on. The main issue is oversaturation, a barrier which I describe in more detail in my post Why web 2.0 kinda sucks. [...]
Write a comment
You need to login to post comments!
Comment from Jack Rack
Time November 5, 2007 at 4:46 am
“In conclusion, I don’t recommend building a web 2.0 site. Don’t waste your time and money.”
But your site doesn’t need to be the next youtube to make a lot. Look at Yuwie.com. It looks like it crawled out of a garbage dump and has a concept that will never really take off crazily. It may even be dead in the next 3 years. But the owner still makes a shitload.