Vanilla 1 is no longer supported or maintained. If you need a copy, you can get it here.
HackerOne users: Testing against this community violates our program's Terms of Service and will result in your bounty being denied.

So finally the news sites are catching up with the rest of us?

edited November 2005 in Vanilla 1.0 Help
But are we ready for it?

You bet your sweet bippy that we are!

Newsvine is the project and Mike Davidson is one of the masterminds behind it. They promise that they will bring a fresh way to grasp news that past didn't see coming.

So who is as excited as me?

Learn more about this at Mike Industries.


  • edited November 2005
    Am I the only person here who does a little mental (>_<) every time I hear the phrase "user-moderated"? We already have a user-submitted and moderated news service. It's called Digg. And while there may be an interesting story on there occasionally, most of the time it just blows.
  • I've been meaning to make a pastiche of "Web 2.0" signup pages, and could be the inspiration I've been looking for...
  • Such hotility against web 2.0, sure web 2.0 is just a buzz word, but you have to look beyond it. It's a buzz word for something that is quite real actually, more control on information is the way of the future. Web sites and communities that cater to your specific needs at that very moment. Blinded by hatred towards a marketting word is sad.
  • It just seems that everything new is being labelled Web 2.0.

    Has anyone actually stated exactly what defines something as Web 2.0?

    I'm all for innovation and there's some truly great stuff coming out but it all seems to be a massive buzzword orgy.
  • NickENickE New
    edited November 2005
    There's bound to be something in one of these links which may clarify it a bit more:
  • So it can really be summed up as:

    Websites that refresh dynamically without having to reload the page and user generated data.

    That makes my website Web 2.0 yo! :P
  • Web 2.0 is pretty much AJAX, CSS, JavaScript, and tags. And surprise, all of those things have been around for years, and browser support for them has barely improved at all (since IE has been in total stasis), but suddenly now it's the Second Coming of the Web. I'm all for web standards and maintainable semantic code. Ajax is a nice tool for web apps that don't make sense as page-to-page navigation and stuff like the textbox autofill thing that Vanilla does. JavaScript can add a richness and layer of polish to an otherwise static page, if not overdone. Tags are a legitimate way of marking up information so it can be organized by a machine. All these things are wonderful tools, useful for solving certain web usability problems. The problem is that, when you make these things the fundamental pillars of "the new web", they struggle to assume greatly exaggerated roles that they were not meant for, and end up annoying users.
  • Web 2.0 is actually more standard than web 1.0 ever was, it has been collectively developed as a collection of technologies but it is the whole of so many things that it's stupid to call label ALL technologies involved to it so they just call it web 2.0 just to keep things simple. If you wish to talk separately about some technology you may do so, believe me. But look beyond the buzz word that media industry has created out of web 2.0 and actually gather knowledge and information about something before you go out bashing and ranting about it, try to be professional or atleast civil.
  • Examples of this magical industry?
  • 3stripe3stripe ✭✭
    edited November 2005
    I've been meaning to make a pastiche of "Web 2.0" signup pages

    I wasn't having a go at Web 2.0... i was just saying I think the way they all have the same kind of signup pages with the big centered forms is quite funny.... anyhows I don't want to interreupt the arguments so please continue ;-)
  • Examples of this magical industry?

    You need examples of the media industry?
  • First of all, "the media industry" is pretty much the entire internet. I would like examples of the use of "Web 2.0" technologies or concepts being used in anything resembling novelty.
  • And pretty much the whole internet is responsible of making web 2.0 a buzzword. There are many sites that use things like Ajax as just a novelty, and even if many of the technologies gathered for the "web 2.0" like XML/XHTML and Syndication are old, they haven't been in popular use until as of late. And things like RoR that are in continuing development have taken things even further. You really should read the insightful article about web 2.0 at wikipedia, it really explains alot of things.
  • edited November 2005
    The article basically agrees with my point; the concepts involved are a combination of five years of incremental improvements and fads.

    The only real difference between now and 2001 is that investors are finally coming out of their post-bubble shell shock regarding all things technological, and the influx of cash has blown hype all out of proportion. Again.

    (I can actually think of a few reasons why this time around may not end disastrously, that's not the point.)

    That isn't bad, heck in many ways it's great to have a bunch of new design toys to play with, but it sure as hell isn't revolutionary either.
  • Kosmo: When you say standards are you referring to more than just W3C standards?

    As you state, that wikipedia article is a great read. Very well written too in my opinion.
  • Like I said, the "web 2.0" is just a name to call all new technologies when they interact as a whole, like a blog, with syndication and user contribution, spiced up with Flash, Ajax and such. You are concentrating way too much on the word itself, it's like operating system, itself, it's just a program that actually is very small part of what computer does, there are several parts of hardware, software and user interaction. You are the victim of the buzzword. gigi: I mean all sorts of standards, the ones W3C has been developing like XForms, DOM, XML and then things that others are developing like SVG (yeah that was a great invetion) and Flex.
  • /me stands well back
  • edited November 2005
    Arguing with you is like yelling at the timecube guy; points just seem to bounce right off you :D

    I understand the technologies involved. They're wonderful. However, (at the moment) they lack the transcendental Voltron-like unity that you describe.

    Lumping together a bunch of relatively new tech under a common heading is fine, as long as we understand that it's nothing revolutionary. People have been writing webapps for about as long as there's been a browser. All RSS does is point out just how much HTML is lacking the basic tags necessary to semantically mark up the structure of a standard web page.

    The danger of seeing this stuff as "a new generation of web apps" is that it feeds into the "browser as a universal webOS" bullshit that's lately been infecting the thoughts of some otherwise very intelligent people (Kottke, for example, though I've heard it thrown around this board too).
  • MarkMark Vanilla Staff
    transcendental Voltron-like unity

    hahaha - I love that. I want it on a bumper sticker.
  • edited November 2005
    Well, um, I'm pretty sure you own copyright to anything we post on this forum...

    (EDIT: Nevermind, you don't. Hah)

    Regardless, you can make as many bumper stickers as you like.

This discussion has been closed.