<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="http://blogs.technet.com/utility/FeedStylesheets/rss.xsl" media="screen"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"><channel><title>Web 2.0 Definition and Hype</title><link>http://blogs.technet.com/michael_platt/archive/2006/03/16/422247.aspx</link><description>I do get very fed up with the Web 2.0 hype and also all the people who complain about the Web 2.0 hype (which now would include me). I think that the only way of fixing this is to have a crisp definition of what Web 2.0 is and then when a piece of hype</description><dc:language>en-GB</dc:language><generator>CommunityServer 2.1 SP1 (Build: 61025.2)</generator><item><title>re: Web 2.0 Definition and Hype</title><link>http://blogs.technet.com/michael_platt/archive/2006/03/16/422247.aspx#422344</link><pubDate>Fri, 17 Mar 2006 19:00:58 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">d5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:422344</guid><dc:creator>Dion Hinchcliffe</dc:creator><description>Yes Mike, I do think you might have nailed it pretty close indeed.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;I'd love to tweak a few of these though, such as using 'Web' instead of 'network' in the first item to emphasize that particular platform as being essential.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;The only thing I'd add is &amp;quot;Leveraging network effects&amp;quot;. &amp;nbsp;Without network effects, many Web 2.0 apps would be much, much less valuable.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;See you tomorrow in Vegas!&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Best,&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Dion</description></item><item><title>Web 2.0 Definition</title><link>http://blogs.technet.com/michael_platt/archive/2006/03/16/422247.aspx#422506</link><pubDate>Mon, 20 Mar 2006 09:07:30 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">d5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:422506</guid><dc:creator>Erics Blog</dc:creator><description /></item><item><title>Web2.0</title><link>http://blogs.technet.com/michael_platt/archive/2006/03/16/422247.aspx#424734</link><pubDate>Sun, 09 Apr 2006 01:50:00 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">d5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:424734</guid><dc:creator>Ming the Mechanic</dc:creator><description>&amp;amp;quot;Web2.0&amp;amp;quot; is one of the hot buzzwords right now. But a fuzzy term that a lot of people seem to dislike, because, well, it is a buzzword, and there's not wide agreement on what exactly it is, or whether it really is something new. But largely</description></item><item><title>User Generated Rich Content: Creation Nets</title><link>http://blogs.technet.com/michael_platt/archive/2006/03/16/422247.aspx#427543</link><pubDate>Mon, 08 May 2006 12:30:08 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">d5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:427543</guid><dc:creator>Michael Platt's WebLog </dc:creator><description>Interesting report by John Seely Brown and John Hagel III in this months McKinsey report on Creation...</description></item><item><title>Web 2.0??????????????????????????????????????? - ??????Google????????? &amp;laquo;  ????????????</title><link>http://blogs.technet.com/michael_platt/archive/2006/03/16/422247.aspx#3228628</link><pubDate>Tue, 21 Apr 2009 14:51:49 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">d5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:3228628</guid><dc:creator>Web 2.0??????????????????????????????????????? - ??????Google????????? &amp;laquo;  ????????????</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;PingBack from &lt;a rel="nofollow" target="_new" href="http://blog.impanda.org/?p=98"&gt;http://blog.impanda.org/?p=98&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
</description></item></channel></rss>