The Web is dead.
- Started
- Last post
- 22 Responses
- NotByHand0
Just restart your modem.
- talking of which - after a catastrophic firefox crash, I've lost my NTC password - what do I do? *panics*detritus
- LOLProjectile
- buy a new computerflashbender
- Email Pylon, bro.NotByHand
- TheBlueOne0
It's all kind of a bullshit chart because it doesn't take into account actual growth of internet traffic, so while the web is shown as 23% of total internet traffic, that's 23% of a number of magnitudes greater than where you start on the left side of the chart.
I hate, hate and totally distrust mainstream journalism - even Wired - because none of these asshats can write meaningfully about anything. It's all just controversey and "Hey, wowwouldyou lookatthat" useless crap.
Like this chart. Which is meaningless.
- Besides, I quit the biz.TheBlueOne
- Agree completely. Laziest profession in existence besides web designer.ukit
- True. That's why I went into web design and avoided a career in journalism...TheBlueOne
- ...still holding onto the stand up comic dream though. They seem exceptionally lazy.TheBlueOne
- Agreed, all factoids and pseudostats of bullshit doom. Kill it.NonEntity
- flashbender0
how does 'video' fit in there?
FTP / Web / Email / peer-to-peer ... all of these are content delivery methods.
Video is content, it does not really make sense
- Volume of bandwidth?detritus
- im assuming its streaming video, youtube, break, etcHombre_Lobo
- georgesIII0
FLASH KILLED THE WEB!!!
- can you hear me screamgeorgesIII
- http://www.youtube.c…jaylarson
- I can hear you ! http://www.youtube.c…dasmeteor
- detritus0
erm, I don't think the article is at all trying to portray the immediate death of the web (despite the leading, inflammatory headline - I forgot to append their 'long live the internet' subline they employ) just the fundamental shift in usage. Clearly there is 'more web' now than 10 years ago, but if a greater percentage of the comparable sizes is taken up by particular forms of services, then that is indeed newsworthy.
Jeez.
- detritus0
..my point was more to highlight the remainder of their text - the glomerisations of industry ownership and the ease and lack of transparency evident therein.
Stupidly I chose the meaty bits to add in here as lures, knowing that half of the peeps here wouldn't bother otherwise.
That's journalism's problem - it's fighting apathy.
Hence sensationalism.
- erm.. wtf does 'glomerisation' mean? Jesus. 'aggregation' is what I meant.detritus
- Excuse me. I've got to go glomerise something. :DContinuity
- CALLES0
reminded me of this
- DrBombay0
Web site says Web is Dead
(better headline)
- ukit0
- NickInfozure0
Doesn't video come under web as you need the interweb to deliver video? I'm confused.
- You're confusing the web with the internet, or something.DrBombay
- ********0
"The top 10 Web sites accounted for 31 percent of US pageviews in 2001, 40 percent in 2006, and about 75 percent in 2010."
A large percentage of people currently use the web as an alternative to the down-time they'd have traditionally dedicated to TV. Using youtube, facebook, twitter etc to access content that's heavily targeted towards them as consumers.
They're people who are replacing their standard mainstream media channels with alternative mainstream outlets that live on the web.
I think this is a straight paradigm switch, but hopefully it's not always going to be this way. There's still beauty in the web system - because alternatives _can_ exist. The underground still has as much validity as the mainstream, because broadcast technology isn't in the hands of a few gatekeepers (like it was in the age of TV).
Of course, this could change .. a heavily filtered, prioritised web might put an end to the democratisation of the web. I wish net-neutrality had a name that was more instantly understandable .. if the term wasn't so cryptic to uninitiated ears, it might be easier for it to seep into the public consciousness as a necessary requirement for public good.
As for the change in most dominant web applications - I think that the chart is misleading. Video is now seen as a a dominant application - but how's video generally delivered?? Through the web.
Wired is great at speculating and hyping - but I don't think it gets things right so often. I remember in 1997 when Wired was hyping PointCast .. push media seemed like a prospect because we all had super slow modems, and getting media delivered to us over night seemed like a logical solution. Scientists had declared that 56k was about the limit for getting data over copper lines BUT - cable modems were invented and then ADSL proliferated changing everything completely. It's impossible to predict the future, because it's so difficult to predict the introduction of these technologies which change the rules.
I think the main effect of the article is green-light approval for businesses wanting to create gated communities, and filtered / controlled web experiences through app-based interfaces. It's not the most responsible type of journalism.
- TheBlueOne0
Yes, but what about cyberspace?
- TheBlueOne0
..and the information superhighway?
- TheBlueOne0
And how do all these things fit into that series of tubes?
- georgesIII0
boing boing article
http://www.boingboing.net/2010/0…- That illustrates my point above exactly. Thank you georgeTheBlueOne
- ukit0
Actually that's a good point, all the video usage is really just people migrating their habits over from traditional TV and/or DVD movies. I don't know about you guys but I haven't turned my TV on in about a year, I watch everything via the internet now.
Bittorrent on the other hand, is completely new. But it's not really a rival of websites in terms of content, just bandwidth.
So does a huge increase in video and P2P along with a continued increase in website use means the web is dying? Seems like a premature conclusion at best. Frankly this article reads more like corporate wish fulfillment - yes folks, the traditional web is dying, you'll have to pay now.
- ukit0
P.S. I think recall reading that the Wired iPad app outsold their print version which is kind of amazing...and depending on how you look at it is either really great news for paid internet content or bad news for print media..
- clearThoughts0
basically what happened is...
The iPhone/iPad App is the equivalent of a Flash website in 2010. That's why Apple left Flash out of the iPad.