So this PC World story covers the new version of Google Groups, which is now out of beta, which means little in the sense that beta users have been using this interface for months.
A theme in the article is that even the new Groups isn't very web 2.0.
A free Traffick coffee mug to the person who can explain to me:
* What's wrong with Groups, exactly, if it's true that it isn't web 2.0? Is there something vitally important that I need to do that I cannot do here?
* What makes it true to say it isn't web 2.0? Is it even true?
* Can an app that includes a wiki-like feature, which this now does, really be accused of being "not web 2.0"? Is it because it isn't a very good wiki, not a true wiki? (Which is fair to say - it isn't.) So, can we give it a 1.7? The Google spokesman seems only prepared to give it 1.5, and it's his baby. Is Basecamp somewhere below 2.0, then? Because some of its features aren't very good. Maybe 1.85?
Posted by Andrew Goodman
| | Permalink
 |
 |
 |
The Traffick Search Engine Directory :: |
| » Internet Marketing » Internet Tools » Search Engines |
» Web Browsers » Web Portals » Webmaster Tools |
» About the Directory » Add URL » Traffick Report: Flock |
