A client / web 2.0 skeptic asked me to name 5 useful web 2.0 apps other than Flickr yesterday (knowing that I’ll lay down flickr references before the question is even asked). You would have thought a brain tumor unlocked some kind of inner genius in me if you heard how fast I dropped 10…
- Google Reader
- Skype
- Basecamp/Highrise (they should really be a single app)
- del.icio.us
- Wikipedia
- Mint
- FeedBurner
- Feed Rinse
- Geni
- Pipes
And, for the record, I draw a line like a nazi when it comes to labeling apps useful. Just because an app is engaging doesn’t mean it’s useful, at least not in my world. Sorry Twitter, but what have you done for me lately?
Being the debate god in my head that I am, I threw the question back to him: give me 5 useful non web2.0 apps. After a short (long) pause, he dropped 3…
What?!? Those aren’t apps. Those are properties. And, where are Amazon and eBay?
If we’re playing like that, I’ll add…
- YouTube
- MySpace
- Craig’s List
- Virb
- Joost
- NewsVine
- Pownce
- Technorati
- GMail
- Google Analytics (w2o?)
- Google Maps
- Google Docs
- Gears
- GTalk
- Google Calendar
- Upcoming
- Jaiku
- Digg
- StumbleUpon
- iTunes (who says it’s not w2o?)
- OpenID
- MyTinyJesus (just kidding)
- Ma.gnolia
- Revver
- Spock
I could go on. The point is that it’s a lot easier to debate the existence of a clearly defined Web 2.0 category (another argument I’m hearing lately) than it is to debate the value of an entire segment of web things. And, if you’re going to try, you don’t want to be holding Monster or Cars.com in your hand.