Engineering 2.0?
Words and phrases used to identify different approaches to solution development, particularly in the technology domain, can generate their fair share of controversy.
The past two years have seen the rise of the term ‘Web 2.0′ to describe one approach which is specifically concerned with internet technologies. You can find the latest compact definition of Web 2.0 and some discussion around its use here. We interpret Web 2.0 as an approach to developing websites and internet applications that puts people first and technology second. In that sense it should be possible to say that a Web 2.0 approach takes us closer to Inuda – where technology is infinitely useful and easy to use. Unfortunately this is not always true – the term Web 2.0 is easily over-used and, in our view, misused to the point that it has become a near meaningless buzz word that makes many people cringe.
Advocating an ‘Engineering 2.0′ approach might be a nice way of rekindling excitement around more general technology developments. Promoting a new wave of people-focused technology that spans the worlds of physical devices and software. However, if it were to catch on it would most likely end up with the same fate as Web 2.0.
The idea of searching for Inuda is not simply another approach to developing technology. It’s a long term vision that enables people across different disciplines to take a range of development approaches, while working together towards a common aim. If it can bring people together and keep them together the possibilities are endless.
What’s your opinion on Web 2.0, Engineering 2.0 and the search for Inuda? Please share it with a comment below.
Tags: engineering, web 2.0
July 15th, 2008 at 17:48
Paul Graham’s November 2005 essay on Web 2.0 is still very relevant, he starts: “Does “Web 2.0″ mean anything? Till recently I thought it didn’t, but the truth turns out to be more complicated. Originally, yes, it was meaningless. Now it seems to have acquired a meaning. And yet those who dislike the term are probably right, because if it means what I think it does, we don’t need it.” Paul concludes by saying: “It’s like the word “allopathic.” It just means doing things right, and it’s a bad sign when you have a special word for that.” You can read his complete essay here At Inuda Innovations and for other members of the Inuda Network we share the common mantra: “Find Inuda”. You can argue that this also simply means doing things right. Clearly it’s far from ideal for us to feel the need to have such a term. The reason we do is that unfortunately too many organisations do things wrong. They don’t deliver technology solutions that are built entirely around actual users needs. The result is that for far too many people, technology causes as much frustration as does bring benefits.