Help Me Name This Baby
Readers, I need your help. My now famous Web 3.0 framework needs a better name.
Can you help me name this baby in a way that it transcends the versioning of the web?
Print This Post
Comments
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Hi Sramana,
Here are some of my naming suggestions.
–>Trinity (group of three ..4C, P & VS)
–>Web Trinity (To be specific of Web)
–>Web Triad
–>TriWeb (Coined from Triple Web)
-Santosh
P-Web. The Personal Web. Your principles are all really functional changes in support of increased personalization.
Web 3.0 framework of which you speak refer to the “Personalized Web.”
personalized commerce
personalized content (news, info)
personalized community
Much of this personalization will be increasingly done by Verticals, who will take verticals slices of the web that will give us personalized services.
ie: my news, my flights, my vacations, my entertainment, my style, etc.
Yahoo is best positioned to take advantage of the Web 3.0 trend, if Microsoft doesn’t buy Yahoo and break it apart to build MSN instead.
My “now famous”? If you’re not joking, you’re more than a bit delusional and self-important.
Personally, your claim on “Web 3.0″ doesn’t make much sense. Simply put, no part of your definition is new, or even used in a combination that hasn’t been used in some forms since the web began.
And certainly, your take on it isn’t known beyond your readers.
– Charles
Dear Charles,
How do you explain the thousands of readers who land on the web 3.0 definition page every week from Wikipedia and elsewhere?
And how do you explain the entrepreneurs who regularly reach out to me with their “ventures” using my framework?
How do you explain sizable companies building their “strategy” around my framework that invite me to consult with them?
At any rate, if it’s only my readers, that too is not a trivial number, since my readers are not only on my site, but also on many other major sites that syndicate my writings.
It doesn’t make any sense to you, I am very sorry for that.
It does to a lot of others, and this message was directed to those others to whom it DOES make sense.
Not to you.
And I am listening to those of my readers who have commented on my question with great interest.
Listening, thinking, processing.
Thanks, Sramana
‘myWeb’ — hows it?
Hi Sramana,
Your analysis is correct and makes sense.
Some suggestions for the name, impromptu:
1) ‘VertiWeb’ or ‘VWeb’: As Verticalization is the basic framework for Web 3.0
2) I could be wrong but maybe 4C+P+VS can also be termed as ‘Web 2.0 + CONtext + VERTical’
3) In further to one of the suggestions above: ‘Personalized Web’ or ‘IWeb’ or ‘I&V Web’ (with I signifying Personalization and V signifying Verticalization)
Hope this helps.
Best,
Aashish
i send my suggestion to your e-mail
SM,
If we visualize what the Web 3.0 “4C, P & VS” model will help realize for everybody, here are some suggestions -
1. Converge
2. Unify
3. Assemble
Cheers!
What do you think of:
The Brand Intimacy Equation
Brand Intimacy = (4C + P + VS)?
Or,
The Personal Concierge Equation
Personal Concierge = (4C + P + VS)?
I agree with Uday. We are calling this as “Unified Experience” internally within our org.
I see. So the “value” for you is the “unified user experience” versus a “fragmented user experience”.
Not just personalization or intimacy.
SM,
Yes. IMO, Web 2.0 has given us great “niche”, but fragmented experiences. The next stage of evolution i.e. Web 3.0 will be about how you bring all those together and give end-to-end experience.
For example, in shopping vertical, a typical user spends lot of time going to different sites.
For research – Users go to amazon and/or reveiws aggregation sites
Community recommendations – go to social networking sites.
Price comparison – Comparison engines
Buy – Retailer site.
The value for a user is provide unified experience to complete task in few clicks compared to today’s experience.
BTW, I liked your term “Personal Concierge”
Personally, I’m a fan of Santosh’s suggestion, “Trinity.” It’s not very descriptive, true, but it’s catchy and alluring. I am very eager to see a working model of this idea!
Trinity doesn’t work for me. First and foremost, because, there are 6 pieces to the equation – Context, Commerce, Community, Content, Personalization, and Vertical Search.
However, we could consider extending Santosh’s line of thought to Trinity, Quadrinity, Pentinity or Quintinity, and finally, Sextinity.
So far, “Personal Concierge” is the best we’re doing, I think, other than this newly coined “Sextinity Equation”.
What do you think?
How about “Hyperwex”?
Highly Personalized Web Experience
Had some fun with this one…more details here:
http://www.techbubble.net/2008/02/12/Naming+The+Web+30+Framework.aspx
Nik
the many in the one
Sramana,
There may be six pieces to your thesis, but this is a naming exercise, and any good name sythesizes complexity into a bite-sized, memorable nugget. I stand by my first suggestion that it’s about personalization. Now, personalization, by its nature, means different things to different people — that’s what makes it personal. Some want their web to “unify” social experiences while others want a more solitary concierge experience. It’s personal, and the web needs to interact with us in the way that works best for us as individuals. It’s not one size fits all — that’s over.
The User-Centric Web, or “U-Centric” for short. …as opposed to Web 1.0 and 2.0’s URL-centric approach to presenting and finding content.
Options so far:
Votes?
I mean no harm or disrespect, but many of these suggestions are too techy. They’re all about the equation and sramana mitra, and not about the experience.
Try to look at it from the perspective of the end-user.
Forget about the actual equation except as a reference point to evaluate if the name actually is an accurate description.
Any references to equation in the name are silly and would not be a strong branding move.
Early on, we heard many variants of the personalized web. More recently, concierge is a term that captures some of that essence. Try to see if any one of these terms do justice to describe the 3.0 experience.
A roll-up as a name just doesn’t work. Also forget any mention of equation.
There will undoubtedly be many roll-ups and mash-ups. However the name of a new paradigm, if it is indeed a new paradigm, will not be itself a roll-up. The name ought to be a concise elegant expression of the new experience.
Try terms such as:
personal web
concierge web
you web
etc
3.0 does more than any other term to suggest that we are dealing with an entirely different paradigm. A term such as personalized or concierge alludes to the shift in the focus in this new paradigm away from the developer, organization, website and toward the individual needs of each end user.
A customized web of sorts, customized for each user.
I would second Realtosh’s thoughts heartily. A good example is “The Semantic Web” — a total failure as a name because no one can understand it or agree on what it means. A winning name is not “deep” or techie, it’s just simple and descriptive.
My issue with the “concierge” theme is that it draws on a bricks and mortar analogy and also that it’s too e-commerce oriented. The Personal Web is not just about commerce, but community and social networking, and that’s got nothing to do with a traditional concierge service.
Oops, I just used Personal Web. Sorry, but it does fit like a glove.
I like “Personal Web”. I have been gravitating towards that independently as well.
Regardless of how you define it, the framework will evolve over time so calling it ‘personal’ or ‘trinity’ seem too restrictive to sustain. I suggest ‘uber web’
personal web makes most sense but it uses two common words. could make its usage rather awkward. ..’our company website is a Personal Web site’ etc…
can’t think of anything really better, except maybe changing the rules and the Web to My Web = Meb.
Meb?
my two cents.
I agree Jedi.
There are some good examples of Frameworks that people have named well:
Crossing the Chasm: We say, “let’s do a Chasm analysis” …
Blue Ocean Strategy: We say, “let’s follow a blue ocean strategy” …
Long Tail: We say, “We’re marketing to the long tail”.
Similarly, this frameworks needs a name that can be used in business discussions as: “Let’s do XXXX analysis on this web site” or “Let’s apply XXXX to our strategy” or “Let’s build a XXXX site/company/venture”.
So, what fits this XXXX?
Let’s be real, though – those other names were “adopted” by the public because they were good. “Long tail” is simple and descriptive, and it stuck.
I would not over think this. My suggestion would be to pick a name you like, start using it in your Forbes articles, and see if it sticks. Think of it as market research — it takes a bunch of failed ideas before you succeed.
If your real goal is to create a catchy acronym that you can use in consultant-speak and powerpoint presentations, then fall back on some combination of your six conceptual pillars. But that won’t become a mass media name for the concept.
How about “iWeb”? Corny as the suggestion may sound, it was not made in jest. In this Web3.0, “I” must be the center of the universe – it should exist and mold itself to serve me. Otherwise what is the point.
Sramana,
Robin Sloan had come up with “EPIC”- Evolving Personalized Information Construct.
Does that jive at all?
(I personally disagree with version-ing the evolution of the Internet into 2.0/3.0, et al., but I do think the 4C + P + VS concept comes very close to representing the next step up from where we are now).
Speaking of C’s and P’s…have you thought about “Mitra’s 4C+P+VS model”?
I mean, if Porter could pull off 4Ps, no reason why you can’t do something similar…