The link clicks through to an article about the 4th of July…?

I am second..

It’s pretty exciting to see Salesforce innovating so heavily here. My predication is that while it will take time, Force.com revenues will eclipse core Salesforce CRM sooner than most anyone expects. Not this year or next, but as Force.com and other platforms continue to iterate, the lagging reasons not to use a platform (today, mostly functionality) will fall away, and the market opp will be even bigger than CRM. Look at trust.salesforce.com … app aside, think what it takes to build that …

please not this web 3.0 crap

Um..this description of Web 3.0 sounds like Web 0.1 Beta.

Hmm — if web 1.0 was the web as content, and web 2.0 was the web as platform, how exactly does web as platform count as web 3.0? When people ask me what might qualify for the 3.0 monicker (assuming you want to go there - Web 2.0 was a moment in time, a way of saying “the web ain’t dead” after the dot com bust, not a version number), I say the one thing that might qualify is the rise of cloud applications that are primarily experienced on (and driven by) mobile interfaces.

Don’t get me wrong, force.com is interesting, just like all the other web 2.0 platforms, but it’s not a new phase.

I wonder what Tim O’Reilly will make of all this.

Do these guys pay to do guest posts? It seemed to be just a pitch for SalesForce?

Anyway, I don’t buy the web 3.0 concept, what Mark described is already happening, S3, and google App engine and of course force.com are already enabling tremendous innovation with web applications. For massive enterprises though there is still a fear in putting their data in a cloud that is “owned” by someone else. Businesses are moving very quickly and suppliers of services can quickly become competitors.

Simply salesforce spam…come on tech crunch. This post made no sense and has 000000000 value.

I don’t see anything substantially new here to start talking about Web 3.0. True all major players are in the “clouds” these days. The reality though as evident from Amazon’s recent outage is that the clouds still have plenty to prove before “anyone can innovate”

software as a service is great, but how do you monetize it now. The cloud is great, but if some other site is consuming your service they are also consuming every ad impression you would of got. We all know the main business model on the internet is ads.

Ask Benioff why they interview people with no intention of hiring - only to gain outside ideas without having to pay for them.

My laptop has a sticker that says: My other computer is an iPhone.
So there.

The day I see the salesforce.com source code in some kind of public cloud is the day is retract my statement that this post is mainly comprised of bullshit lingo.

It’s actually kind of interesting. I think the commenters are right in that Web 3.0 is just a buzz word. But honestly, the new Creative Commons licensing is increasing the power of developers on the web. Collaborative creations are advancing faster than ever.

I think that is what Marc Benioff’s real point is about this. We’re becoming a global business model where everyone on the web is CEO. Everything we as individuals do has the power to change the direction of new media and it’s happening at an ever increasing rate.

Is there a point where innovation will stagnate or the market will become too saturated with these technological and socioecological advances? Can you imagine the global impact an ElectroMagnetic Pulse would have today? Just try to imagine the impact if we continue to grow exponentially over the next few years.

Benioff and Salesforce are trying to define what Cloud Computing is and what the web 3.0 is and control the spin of it all.

I think salesforce has dropped the ball on the SaaS right now. The APEX language is nothing but a hacked up version of Java and SOQL is a joke. You may be able to get a good percentage of your app developed in it but its the remaining percent that’s the real power, and its just not possible right now unless you hack it up.

They also need to work on their pricing model because having to kick up 25$ or more per seat to sell your full blown app is not going to cut it.

Hows that bridled exuberance working out for web 2.0? Build a better web? 3.0 handing everything over to the Stanford crowd too?

Yikes, waiting for web 4.0

This entire article could be written in one statement: force.com is web 3.0 (according to Marc).

What a sham.

Those who tell of a new methodology have lost touch and cannot innovate - thus they pontificate about what will come. Using the term “Web 3.0″ verifies this mis connect and their naivete.

Building on a dysfunctional 2.0 is flawed, but expected by iteratives. Our interconnected global network has created tectonic shifts that must not and will not succumb to old guard numbering.

This is further evidence that the valley’s hold on innovation will soon go the way of global warming.

Benioff - Start building products and stop creating marketing hype. 90% of your revenues still come from your one product - Salesforce automation.

I agree with a few of the above commenters. This Web 3.0 catchphrase sounds a little bit like someone just trying to be the first to coin the next moniker. In my view, Web 1.0 was made up of individuals/companies presenting information to the viewer. Web 2.0 was adding logic to the site for the user to manipulate data. Web 1.0 or 2.0 was never about infrastructure only the end user experience. I would say this article is describing some more like web 2.1.

If we see something worth calling Web 3.0 it will likely either be related to the mobile realm or maybe cross site intelligence where sites pull features from each other seamlessly. The Web Object Model, you might say. There are small hints of that already, but definitely no standard or way to ensure long term compatibility.

Probably the first thing that has to happen to the Web 2.0 landscape before something supplants it is a weeding out of all these similar but sand-boxed sites that want to charge $20 a month to manage bits of your data. Eventually these web 2.0 entrepreneurs and customers will figure out that it’s not feasible to have a monthly fee with every application you want to use. Especially if all that personal data and functionality disappears the moment you can’t afford the next monthly billing.

Hopefully we will eventually see the ability for sites to interact with the data storage from any other site. So ideally I could have a storage area on Box.net with all my data, but use Google Writer, Zoho Spreadsheet, or Aviary Photo editors to edit my data. Then if I decide that I like Zoho Writer better than Google’s I can just move to a different editor while keeping the same data storage. That would also mean I could have local web connected storage inside my home and be able to be edit exactly the same way from the online apps.

I still don’t know if that could be considered a new version of the web.

This guy has no idea what he’s talking about. Web 2.0 Web 3.0 stfu dude you dont know shit

“Web 3.0 is about replacing existing software platforms with a new generation of platforms as a service.”

Now, what business are you in again?

Generally I think this is a good post and I respect anyone who tries to look into the future and puts serious thought into it. I also think the historical review and interpretation is accurate BUT…

In my experience the breakthrough into new waves of innovation, especially on the web, never came from major platforms that were build to start something new and grandiose. The world wide web itself was started as a experimental project and when Andreesen & Co. went to meet television networks to talk about the web they here dismissed as kids playing with their toys while the ‘big guys’ are building the information super highway for TV on demand … so much for the next big platform.

This analogy doesn’t fully match with this post but it is still relevant in the sense that while the emergence for enabling technology at the right time is critical, it is people (users) and markets that discover opportunities and create new markets. It is people’s pains and frustrations that make them try truly new solutions to old problems and it is other people that prove that those solutions are valuable and make a difference.

Salesforce wanted to create software that is less painful to run, service and maintain. People and businesses proved that this is a good idea and now Salesforce has learned from their developer network that they want not just to outsource their applications but also their development environment - which is brilliant. There are even better examples, i.e. Kevin Rose wanted others to ‘help’ him research for cool and quality content and news on the web while working for a Tech TV channel. the result id Digg.com. Facebook, MySpace, Del.icio.us and even Google have similar stories to tell.

Of course without the necessary tool available (cheap storage and hosting etc.) those web 2.0 services would have never come to existence. So it is the markets willingness to innovate and the drive that comes from frustration and human desires that timely coincide with the emergence of enabling technologies that allow for major waves of innovation to happen. I don’t think one side can do it without the other and while I am a web platform believer I don’t think that the availability of web platform based development can spur a new wave of innovation and adoption comparable the jump form Web 1.0 to 2.0.

A good example here is mobile phone networks. The platform for exciting mobile applications has been around for years now (especially in Europe and parts of Asia) but nothing has really happened until Steve finally could not take the pain of dealing with this crappy Samsung / Nokia… whatever …anymore and wanted the web to finally come to his pocket device. He had the leverage, power and technology available to do it but I am sure the real innovation came from his frustrations with what was available before (is that how it happened?)

Web 3.0?

Whatever you want to call it I believe the next true wave of the web will be the ubiquitous computer / web. Maybe we can call it the UWeb or ueberweb or just the matrix ;-).

I believe that the real next big jump will be that users will not have to know anymore where a specific service or information comes from. Smart-phones, notebooks, desktops, local terminals, ATMs, Fridges, TVs all access web based services and deliver a seamless experience giving me access to relevant information, services, people and functionality at any given time. There is a lot of work to do, walled gardens to tear down and privacy and security issues to deal with but the first step is done. I can feel it, I know it… Damn it, I want and iPhone to access all my stuff from anywhere

I think the above was an excellent, inspiring post and I am sure Mr. Benioff’s company will provide one of the enabling platforms for whatever comes next. I am just not sure if those platforms alone will drive us all the way to ‘3.0′.

Every time I see someone use or try to define web 3.0 it instantly destroys their credibility in my eyes.

tossers

…sounds more like a sales and marketing pitch (i.e. his buddy Jeremy @ CODA) than a change in the software industry. If his company already existed and displayed Web 2.0 characteristics during the Web 2.0 timeframe, why the need for Web 3.0?

“…anyone can innovate, anywhere. Code is written, collaborated on, debugged, tested, deployed, and run in the cloud…” Sounds exactly like what amazon and his own company are doing now during Web 2.0.

dibs on Web 99.0

This is a wonderful definition of web3.0 and truely opens up the world. Imagine a small group of developers now have the power to build powerful -scalable and hosted applications - without needing to bother about the underlying infrastructure.
However, aspects such as security-(web based or transaction based) to support critical applications might still take time to happen.
Something like the cloud will be the - in thing to simulate personalisation of human content - anywhere, anytime.

I thought we we’re already in Web 4.82 … 6742.34499999 oh forget it.

goodness gracious, my eyes are starting to glaze over with all the “Web 3.0? Wow-o-wee what’s that? I guess I’ll go with/against Marc’s definition” posts…

I’ll first agree what a some have already said - this is clearly a bit of a disappointing article to have read in TechCrunch because it clearly crosses the line between insightful or useful reporting and marketing/propaganda to coin a buzzword and launch a company’s prospects. While I am excited about the potential of what cloud computing, mobile data management, and web based applications holds, I’m not buying this as Web 3.0. It’s a fair argument about computing innovation and what these technologies hold for the future of business but let’s be clear, that’s not the web.

If I follow Marc’s definitions of “Web 1.0, 2.0 and 3.0″ he’s really talking just about the client experience and this is related to and different from what Tim Berners-Lee and others have described the Web as which is much, much deeper than a client experience. Granted, I’ll concede that my particular biases preclude that I look at this much more from the perspective of content and how it is formed, shaped, and managed. That being a given, the “iterations” of the Web can be briefly summarized as :

Web 1.0: content is created, managed, and pushed by the author

Web 2.0: content is created, managed, and pushed by the community

Web 3.0: content is created, managed, and pushed by intelligent systems (i.e. the “semantic” web)

That’s a clear oversimplification, but to branch out would just be giving us 1.1s, 2.4.7s and so forth which is not an exercise for this space but feel free to tawlk amongst yourselves.

But getting back to the “client experience” - I’m unclear why Marc would address the TechCrunch crowd with those definitions if he wasn’t trying to control the argument of “What is Web 3.0″ and use that to influence public thinking towards Salesforce’s market strategy. I’m surprised so many are falling for it.

It is fruitful however, to engage in a discussion about what you think Web 3.0 really is - it’s been happening for some time now on many different levels and coming from different perspectives.

The argument about “web as software applications” is an old one that goes back to post-mainframe computing visions but was well articulated 10 years ago when Larry Ellison was pushing the idea of a “Network Appliance” and how a web/data based computing structure would render the OS obsolete. I could argue that that has been the driving force between great web apps like writely, salesforce, etc. and it’s a wonderful innovation but again, I don’t buy it alone as web 3.0

You might recall about 8-9 years ago, towards the end of 1.0, there were a lot of interesting buzzwords tossed around like “B2B” and eBusiness this and eThat that represented a lot of the transactional events that could happen on the web shortly before the first crash. Well, no one was using the “1.0″ and “2.0″ definitions at the time but it was an interesting time when people were eagerly buying into a concept of “Web revolution” that was largely pushed by businesses on the web. I won’t argue that the same thing will happen again but today, no one looks at the B2B concept and says “that’s Web 2.0.”

web 3.0 to the rescue.

Thanks to God that Marcus Benningoff has introduced Web 3.0. Finally, I say. The Internets sorely needs innovation and one surefire way is to introduce a new label before the innovation starts. Gentlemens, start your engine. Peoples of the Valley need to move beyond the tubes of the Internet and think into the cloud.

What Bennington is trying to say is that cloud computing is a revolutionary way of web hosting. Imagine if we had a revolutionary method of delivering water into people’s homes, imagine all of the new, innovative solutions that would be created that would involve water. Hosting is not simply some generic, commodity-driven service. Right now, lack of good hosting and cloud computing is a serious impediment to Web 2.0 and social networking. I myself find myself unable to socially network with others in a synergistically, optimized way due to the lack of cloud computing. If Force.com can bring this to the Enterprise, move us into the cloud, and away from the tubes, I will thank TheForce.com.

Web 2.0 seriously lacked profits. Let’s move on to Web 3.0. Benninson is a billionaire, however. So check yourself before you wreck yourself.

Quelle honte! Shameful SFDC propaganda to match a shamefully slow and over-priced SFDC product.

Vive WPF. Get the truth: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b0Afwj9_d-g

It reminds me of web 1.0 and the term ASP (Application Service Provider)
web 3.0 its about mobile apps

I am not sure about web 3.0…. 2.0 has not even come out yet. And where does the iPhone fit in? To me the iPhone (and devices like it - HTC Touch Pro) will be the next wave… seems trivial, but mobile is the next wave.

Maybe one the reasons that Marcus threw ‘Web 3.0′ into the arena, is that he hopes with the possible ‘Platforms Services’ that is launched in Web 3.0, developers can finally make some hard earned cash.

So far, Web 2.0 has only been about developing cool ‘free’ features, that at the end of the day does not generate any money.
We are all doing so many great Web 2.0 things online now,from Skype, Zoho, Facebook and Google Maps, which is relevant and totally free.

Only the big boys like Google, Microsoft and Yahoo, will ever make money in serving up ads online, but for the rest of the start-ups there is no other ways of generating vital business revenues.
Maybe ‘paid’ ‘Platform Services’ that can offer must have services or killer apps to all users will be the difference between Web 2.0 and Web 3.0. Otherwise dark ‘Clouds’ may appear in the horizon.

I’ve had first-hand experience with “Salesfarce”. If it is an example of what we can expect from Web 3.0, then God help us. In seven days time, their tech support could not properly interface a simple Web 1.0 CGI form’s state abbreviations field.

Let’s see… The definition of “Web 2.0″ remains ethereal, and “Web 3.0″ will take place in the clouds. From the standpoint of someone in the trenches–where we have to build websites with buttons that actually click, pages that actually sell, and forms that actually submit–Mr. Benioff comes across as just another techno-marketeer using meaningless labels to hype unnovative solutions.

foo

Great definition of web 1.0, 2.0, 3.0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v.....re=related

Since Benioff can’t get a $10B capitalization on his SFA business, he’s trying to position his company as a Web 3.0 company in order to bump up his capitalization from $8.5B to $10B. I’m speculating of course…but heck, why else would he make such an outrageous claim.

An article defining Web 3.0 by the CEO of Salesforce. … of course it’s gonna be about SAAS. What did you think?

Well If i was the CEO of Twitter and i was to write an article about Web 3.0, of course it’s gonna be about Micro-Blogging. What did you think?

If i was the CEO of Nokia and i was to write another article about Web 3.0, of course it’s going to be about the convergence within mobile phones. What did you think? No prizes for guessing that right.. DUH!!

Bottom line, Web 3.0 has got to impact the global community as a whole, not just the business community.. DUH AGAIN… it should be about INNOVATION, a revolution… not TRANSFORMATION from Software To Web.. DUH! Transformation from software to web in layman’s terms is called

… UPGRADING…

that’s all… Gimme a break Marc.

i like the SaaS platform though but it’s never going to be good enough to champion the Web 3.0 cause because of privacy, ID theft, access times, security and data loss issues.

Recent general survey in the Americas, Europe and Asia concluded that only 2.5% of the 5,230 participants have heard of SaaS. And out of that 3%, 24% have heard of Salesforce, the remaining 76% goes to Google Apps/ Zoho / 37 Signals Apps and Acrobat.Com.

Give yourself a break Marc. *sigh*