Andre posted this Nascar-style assemblage of Web 2.0 company logos. Though there's a number of great apps/services in there for whom I have a lot of respect, I am pretty happy that Six Apart is not in there. I just can't help but feel a little discomfited by the preponderance of soundalike names. And how much revenue, exactly, have all these companies made? Combined?
I'm not saying it's all about or only about the money. But this stuff's too important for us to let it become another bubble with no editing and no filtering. Not to say that any of these companies should be filtered out, but we do need to look pretty carefully at what's coming up. Just discoving this many entrants and making all of these into viable entities is a lot for any one industry to absorb. As with everything else, aspiring for sustainability is a great goal.
For even more overload ;), be sure to check out the Web 2.0 map.
It should be noted as well, as Andre does, that the logo collage was first posted here: http://flickr.com/photos/stabilo-boss/93136022/.
most of those companies are making information toys, not tools
Hi Anil,
Are you using ajax on your blogs for links, I have checked openlaszlo.com.
Is that what you are using ?
regards
Sriram
I don't really see how web 2.0 is any different from the bubble in the late 90s. I think one of the main reasons that it's getting so much hype is that companies (Yahoo, Google, etc) are buying out some of these web 2.0 sites. Not really sure how that's much different from before. The idea of profitability is still missing for almost all the web 2.0 sites I've seen.
I applaud SmugMug for having built a successful business with a profitable business plan. Most other (web 2.0 or not) photo sharing sites will eventually run out of steam or investment. You can't feasibly give gigs of space for free in return for users...unless you're exit plan is to get acquired. But what type of business plan is that?
Smells of bubble.
Well said Anil - has anyone else noticed similiarities in typographic layout and color palletes? All of those logos look so much alike. I've visited most of the sites shown on this logo page and they all look and feel so similiar.
Not to be too snarky, but soundalike names? Would those be like: 43Places, 37Signals, 23HQ, 60Spots, 9Rules, 411metro? Cause yeah, I'm glad that 6Apart isn't in there. =-)
hey that pic has private permissions on it, hence people that don't have your permission cant view it.
The difference between dotcoms in late 90's and Web 2.0 is different in that Web 2.0 companies really successfully make money. They have much more sophisticated revenue sources than simply selling ad views. But it is not only about money - it is about maturity of their business models. There are exceptions, though...
Hello, is pushed you coincidence over your Blog, comes from Austria and wishes you all good to the USA, wants times America a vacation to start must however surely still save most expensively comes the flight. well then still much success Manuel
To echo Kenrick, is there any way those of us not in Torrez's inner cicle can take a closer look at that graphic? Looks interesting!
Thanks.
There's a complete list of these web 2.0 companies here:
Digg Watch Blog
Nothing new really. On early stages, segmented market and thousands of small players is quite common, you know. You will wonder but bubble in the late 90th was no wonder as well. Many disruptive technology innovations are accompanied by huge number of players. anyone know how many car manufacturers were in usa in the early 20th century? do you know how many car manufacturers in china now? more than 6000 - most of them small independent manufacturers. so there is nothing new in all these fluctuations.
Lol that is just way too much! I cant handle it, reminds me of that milliondollar page with each pixel sold as add space.
I still think that selling adspace on the body is the way to go. Forget this, let me sell off every square inch of visible skin!
Actually, I'm afraid there's a part two which does have Six Apart listed - as well as Livejournal and OpenID. Sorry ;)
hey that pic has private permissions on it, hence people that don't have your permission cant view it.