Web 2.0?

Quote from: silent at Sep 08, 2006, 03:07 PM

Honestly, I don’t think anyone of you has got the point yet:

Please enlighten us then

Quote from: silent

(...) Ajax is something quite different, just a new member of the toolbox, in some ways related to this new approach, but not directly, since 2.0 does not deal with the tools but with the aims... and Ajax has as much to contribute to distribution-sites as to collaboration-sites.

To put it even shorter:
1.0 == document (read)
2.0 == database (select/update/insert)

Now you’re summing it up quite well

That would mean we have been into web 2.0 for quite a while then, because what you say is - ever since we had web application to update, manage the content (be it a blog, forum, wiki, gallery or whatever) of our websites - we have been into web 2.0.

I agree that dynamic pages and separation of content and presentation are both the true evolution here. I felt it when I used my first CMS in 2000, the possiblities that it opened were just amazing when you came from static webpages...

Quote from: sottwell at Sep 09, 2006, 12:40 AM

For example, I have a client who wants to be able to directly get data from a local embedded MSSQL application and publish it to their website, and edit the web version online and have the results update the local MSSQL database. The very expensive desktop application they have is hooked into Word and Excel and does it from those programs, so why can’t my web application do the same? That nice, slick AJAX-based inline data grid editing app looks enough like an Excel clone that they can’t understand why you can’t do that. I suppose with .net it could, but I didn’t contract to do .net. The thought makes my blood run cold

It’s funny you’d say that, because I got a very similar request a few weeks ago, which of course I am nowhere near qualified to build (if I was contracted for it, I’d call someone from the team to tell me how much it cost and if doable at all). As you say, the client wonders why it’s not easily doable. Of course they want this for 2000$ and will find it expensive at that

Quote from: PaulGregory at Sep 09, 2006, 04:06 AM

And yes, people will happily pay thousands for a custom application, yet expect a website to do the same thing for next to nothing.

Exactly !

Question is : why is that ?

Question is : why is that ?

It’s because clients think that "data is just data and connections from here to everywhere are ubiquitous."
Basically: they aren’t completely wrong, and sometimes - due to their naivety - ahead of their "solution"-providers - they only underestimate the technical efforts still required.
Honestly: the gap between web and desktop is going to be closed during the next few years. And this will also give a different prospect to what "content management" means.
To come back to my previous post: we’re still using databases to "simulate" documents (MODx does exactly that) - but I argue that’s just a legacy issue. "Content" will get far more dynamic and distributed, and as well as the desktop won’t be able to stay in - not really "splendid" - isolation nor will any CMS-software.

just my 4 cent...

EDIT: the 5th cent/sense: about 2 decades ago (with "dbase III") I got very excited on the "group-theory-like" approach of SQL and all that stuff. Then, due to short-term business requirements, which lasted, helas: 2 decades I forgot about most of those ideas. Now they come back, stronger than ever, and they hopefully will free us from this document (i.e. paper) paradigm.