John Dvorak isn’t just cranky, he’s cranky and wrong
08.01.07John C. Dvorak, Cranky Geek and long respected old dude, has penned a shallow but multi-part whine about the web 2.0 economy and the likelihood that it's going to collapse at any moment. It's titled Bubble 2.0 Coming Soon and it's crap. This stuff drives me nuts - so I'm going to blog about it.
Ubiquitous broadband and the clear utility of the internet is changing the world and all our lives. Millions of people are using MySpace and YouTube and they are never going back. Small companies are seeing their technology get acquired or licenced and leveraged by large brands left and right. There are countless parts of everyday life that are or could be benefiting from asynchronous, distance-free communication online. In the mean time there's an entire economy being built and it's ok to be excited about it.
Dvorak's screed has hit Digg and Slashdot, probably because there are lots and lots of people who are in a position similar to his. They don't want to lose face by being enthusiastic about the internet again for fear its economy could take another big downturn. They aren't paying enough attention to tell the difference between Blip.tv and Vimeo. (Blip works closely with publishers of grassroots serialized content and is licenced by CNN and Vimeo is an IAC property that emphasized privacy, the arts and is being used to serve ads across IAC properties. Neither is a "YouTube clone.") Finally, I think they are freaked out at their oncoming loss of status when the media gates are thrown open, the youngsters freak out over incomprehensible rock and roll and these oldsters are plagued in their sleep by Dramatic Chipmunks turning and looking at them accusingly - over and over again but saying nothing.
It doesn't have to be like that. Everyone can appreciate the awesomeness that is the emerging web of user generated content, online video and countless other paradigm shifting innovations. This is like the invention of the printing press or the television. It really is.
First though, we've got to clear up some misconceptions. Conveniently, Dvorak today posted almost every tired trope of the web 2.0 cynic. His list in italics, my responses afterwords. I wrote this on the city bus going home from work - I think it warrants even if it doesn't require a more thorough engagement.
Every single person working in the media today who experienced the dot-com bubble in 1999 to 2000 believes that we are going through the exact same process and can expect the exact same results—a bust...
Neo-social networking. Today everything from YouTube to the local church has a social-networking angle. And this doesn't even consider the actual social-networking sites, from MySpace to LinkedIn to Facebook to even Second Life. This scene is totally out of control and will contribute to the collapse for sure.
I say: Social networking is an emerging utility that combines the functionality of blogging's self publishing with the usefulness of email list serves. Social networking services make these activities more accessible than ever before. They are a great way to find people you've lost touch with (MySpace, for example) and the local church is going to continue eating up the collaboration and easy content management that social networking provides. Niches here will be even more viable when profile and newsfeed portability is made easier. These services provide substantial value to the lives of everyday people and they will never go away as long as the internet exists.
Video mania. With dozens and dozens of YouTube clones cropping up to get on the "throw money away" bandwagon, you must sense that the eventual shakeout in this space will have a negative impact.
I say: Ad networks (ok, ad networks) tell me that there are countless niche video sites, from car lovers to cooking, that are already making money on video. There are food blogs alone with subscribers in the hundreds of thousands. Make it even easier to incorporate video into these strong niches online and the money being invested in this sector will make plenty of sense. I work for one of these vendors, but I took the job because I believe in the sector's future.
User-generated content. This idea has been around since Usenet and just keeps improving. It will make no contribution to the overall collapse except for users reporting the collapse.
I say: UGC is the content that ads are sold against and publishing services themselves are in some cases directly monetizable (Flickr, for example). Dvorak should have argued that fear of brand damage by UGC is a threat to the web 2.0 economy - I think it's one of the most viable threats, in fact. In the long run, though, there's just too much money to be made in an entirely new economy for advertisers to stay on the sidelines much more for much longer.
Mobile everything. Here is another concept that has been in play since the mid-1990s. It cannot trigger a collapse since it will never fully get off the ground, although the iPhone mania may be a bad sign of something.
I say: Oh come on, now. Can anyone really not tell the difference between the mobile economy of today and of 10 years ago? Everyone has mobile phones now and the mobile experience is much more compelling. I'm not talking about the iPhone, I'm talking about global demand for mobile content and services that blows away anything in history and makes supply an undeniably big business. Unless, that is, North America turns out to be some freak of the developed world.
Ad-leveraged search. Most search engines will fail as a matter of course. This segment of the industry is mundane. It would be affected by a crash but not trigger one.
I say: Maybe maybe not. There will probably be a lot of consolidation here but good search is good search. Google's not going anywhere and it's the foundation of the search economy.
Widgets and toolbars. I cannot see the widget scene going crazy, and the jury is still out on toolbars. But there is the potential for nuttiness, I think. The problem here is that these things tend to be dependent on the stability of operating systems and browsers. One bad operating-system patch and suddenly nothing works.
I say: What on earth is he talking about? Are widgets an OS dependent application on the desktop? Maybe 5 years ago - today the vast majority of widgets live on web pages and make the *proven* "small pieces loosely joined paradigm" accessible to people with fewer technical skills than ever. Monetization? Advertising, data mining or loss leader - there's plenty of hope for widgets.
Toolbars? The jury is still out on toolbars? Who does Dvorak hang out with that even talks about toolbars anymore - much less for whom the jury is out?
Why on earth is this man considered a leading voice on tech? I'm guessing that it's because he speaks to the potent paranoia of much of the aging population - afraid in the face of a changing, confusing world that they will face humiliation if they bet on new tech, that they will be unemployed if things take a downturn or that they will lose their self-righteous know-it-all credentials if this new economy does succeed.
I for one am sick of it. I'm excited about the direction the web is going in and I think many people truly paying attention are as well.
August 1st, 2007 at
I think his article was way off mark. He seems to be living in the previous decade of dial-up connections.
My kids are too impatient for their favourite band to appear on MTV, they search on You Tube and watch it on demand, they are 8 and 10 year olds. This generation will drive the web, those that were born with the internet and know nothing else.
The billions of internet users don’t talk nor think about a bubble, only journalists trying to save their careers do.
August 2nd, 2007 at
What struck me most is the first sentence of his pointless rant.
“Every single person working in the media today who experienced the dot-com bubble in 1999 to 2000 believes that …”
Seriously John,every single person working in the media today?
August 2nd, 2007 at
I think John Dvorak needs a vacation. Seriously.
August 2nd, 2007 at
word.
(thanks for blogging that he’s a cranky idiot, so that i don’t have to
so many ridiculous assertions and incorrect analyses i wanted to pound the monitor.
August 2nd, 2007 at
Rock on Marshall!
August 2nd, 2007 at
thanks for disabusing us of the notion of a Bubble 2.0 and its impending bursting
August 2nd, 2007 at
[…] Silicon Alley Insider, CrunchGear, A VC, CostPerNews, MYBLOG by Ouriel, JD on EP, Marshall Kirkpatrick, Master of 500 Hats […]
August 2nd, 2007 at
Marshall, this is one of your best post !!! That was very enlightening and cutting-edge accurate.
August 2nd, 2007 at
[…] We’ve got a double-troll whammy today — twin trolls, if you will — from the always dependable John Dvorak at PCMag and from Sir Elton John in The Sun, that most credible of British tabloids. The former launched into one of his patented Dvorak rants, thick with portents of imminent doom but thin on actual facts and/or details, in this case about the coming bubble (a troll that caught Fred Wilson and Marshall Kirkpatrick, among others). […]
August 2nd, 2007 at
That has to be the single worst piece of journalism I’ve read this year. Wow.
However, just because it’s poorly thought out, badly written and backed up with gossamer-thin explanations, let’s not be silly enough to disregard the central point of what he’s saying out of hand. We are back in a situation where valuations are being made that have no relation to revenue or realistic projections; that’s going to result in some kind of collapse eventually.
The ideas, approaches and products we’re seeing now won’t go away. But I think our attitudes towards them, and the way they interact both with each other and desktop-bound applications, are going to have to change. It’ll be interesting to see how things evolve over the next three years or so.
August 2nd, 2007 at
THIS is WHY you are the MAN!!! I also thought about saying something about this, but you had the kahunas to take Dvorak on and why shouldn’t you? You are Marshall Kirkpatrick, and imho, your word is more authoritative than Dvorak.
From the first sentence of that article it pissed me off. He acts like there is no one that survived the first dot com boom. Geesh D - get a freakin’ life. Catch up with the times.
I have been talking about this a lot lately. “Go with the flow”. I could be just like that old geek and talk about “Well back in the day of terminal servers, and dial in connections… blah.. blah.. blah freakin’ blah” — you know what?
Those days were cool, but now is even 100x cooler! Why would I want to go back and relive dial up nightmare days?
Anyways, ping me later when you awaken from your snooze - I have a question about your phone.
1 cuppa joe down… heading to get another!
Rex
August 2nd, 2007 at
Thanks for your public response to Dvorak’s piece. I really didn’t understand his point. This is what business does. Something new comes along, lots of people get in the game, and then the market consolidates and a few companies come out as big winners.
Why is getting excited about the latest technology development a bad thing? It’s because so many people throw themselves into the game that we wind up with something useful in the end.
August 2nd, 2007 at
I agree with the thought that this ‘new economy’ is not going away, and that the marketing dollars are big enough to bring outsiders in, but I disagree 100% that we are not going to have a bubble burst.
Reason One
As stated above, we are now in the realm of valuations without reality. Today Disney bought a Club Penguin for $350M and there is potentially another $350M to be paid. Okay, WTF is that? Sorry to be so brash, but seriously.
I was part of banking side of life back when the bubble burst last and this is the kind of behavior that I remember leading up to the ‘end.’
Second
People will start to become bored with social networking. Right now it is filling a need for many people that used to go unmet. Prior to the Web 2.0 boom, most people didn’t have the networks of friends, they had a small group of friends and a small group of business associates, at best. As societal group, we crave interaction, and, this new means to interact without having to worry about face-to-face confrontation has filled a need. However, like all needs, when satisfied, they simmer down.
Third
Eventually, sites like Digg and Flickr will be the only main user generated content sites. Why? Because, relating to the above post, as a group, we are going to get sick of posting about what kind of shit we just took looks like.
Fourth
Consumerism is loosing ground, and within 10 years, the purchasing behavior or most consumers will be altered drastically to reduction. Already, there are many posts about who Adwords and Adsense are no longer bringing about the results they used to. The reason for that is that the consumer is getting sick of buying and is blending more and more with the citizen. As the consumer and citizen blend, political/social needs become a larger part of the buying cycle. Marketers are simply trying to keep up, and that’s about it.
Fifth
Missionaries are entering Second Life, whenever the missionaries come, you know the party is over.
Web 2.0 is a wonderful revolution of communication and the use of the Internet. It has defined a new set of rules and brought us all closer together. But, it is not something that is set in stone and it is not something that is going to continue to go up and up.
The next go round, I believe will result in a more permanent structure, one that will last much longer.
August 2nd, 2007 at
spot on.
Re: Mobile everything. Here is another concept that has been in play since the mid-1990s. It cannot trigger a collapse since it will never fully get off the ground, although the iPhone mania may be a bad sign of something.
Ikes! Where do I begin….
M - you were almost too kind on this one. If anyone has spent 10 minutes in parts of the developing world, the first thing you notice when you leave the airport terminal is that mobile phone usage has filled the gap left by shoddy or non existent land line connectivity and hands down, beats web usage on a computer. In fact its the broadband enabled computer that “never fully got off the ground” there. Folks in these places sometimes get to use a computer once every few weeks but they’ve already visited many of the sites we use and rely on. The econimics make it affordable for an employer to provide mobile phones to every employee now, and with carte blanch usage authority. On a global level, mobile is not just a convenience, its the only way. I’ve seen it happen first hand in rural India and just last week, in Africa.
Yes there are always “me too” companies that spring up during an innovation spurt but its hardly a reason to bring the disruptive ones down to their knees.
August 2nd, 2007 at
One of your best pieces ever, Marshall. You make me proud. LOL.
Folks need to understand that with every new, disruptive economy that has emerged in the last 150 years there have been bubbles and bursts along the way. And sometimes it’s hard to see the forest when you’re lost among the trees. Dvorak is among the lost.
Thanks for keeping us all on the path, Marshall.
August 2nd, 2007 at
Basically, orthogonal arguing.
Like Mari says, Dvorak’s fundamental thesis is correct: emergent markets attract a “gold rush”, which will tend to initially self-feed until it consolidates and/or collapses.
However, Dvorak spices up his thesis with the usual “Irritable Male Syndrome” complaints and ruins the main point totally.
Then, we get anti-Dvorak pieces like this one that focus on these sideline embellishments, argue orthogonally to the original thesis in a knee-jerk fashion, and add to the fire.
August 2nd, 2007 at
[…] Bubble, bubble, toil and trouble Marshall Kirkpatrick slaps down John Dvorak. Rex Dixon joins in and applies a few kicks to the groin. […]
August 2nd, 2007 at
Marshall you MISSED his point!
He’s not talking about the demise of web 2.0
but the demise of all the web 2.0 “WANNABES”
How many
Diggs,
You Tubes,
Facebooks,
Twitters,
Flickrs,
etc…
can there be?
Markets can’t handle many wannabes,
and right now web 2.0 wannabes are all the RAGE!
August 2nd, 2007 at
The point about a crash is NOT that the economy stops.
The point about a crash is that
1: A large number of companies operating in a particular market are suddenly valued at a much lower level than they were previously. (Some to the point that they stop trading.)
2: Investors stop looking to find for startups to fund in that market.
A crash wouldn’t mean that the local vicar STOPPED having a blog… but might mean that “BlogsForChurches.com” turned out not to be worth $100m after all.
Mark
August 2nd, 2007 at
All of you who think that there will be no bubble burst are of the same kind that felt the same back in 99/00.
Mike B says “And sometimes it’s hard to see the forest when you’re lost among the trees. Dvorak is among the lost.”
I think he has it backwards. All of you who think that we need more user generated content sites, more social media, are amongst the lost. Over saturation is just that, over saturation.
I had originally prepared a much longer response that provided examples and more substantial proof as to why web 2.0 is bound to have a bubble bust, but my comments were not taken by this site.
btw - I’m 30 years old and have been part of this thing in earnest since 1995. I believe that we have to go through another bust, why, because that is the nature of the Internet, 5 year incremental booms and busts.
In closing - sooner or later, we’re all going to get sick of talking to each other without ever physically interacting.
August 2nd, 2007 at
You should blog on the bus more often.
chris from rawstylus.wordpress.com
August 2nd, 2007 at
@10668844: I don’t disagree that there will be a shakeout. My point was actually that a burst of some magnitude would be in line with historical trends. However, I believe such a disruption will spurn even greater creativity and innovation on all “Web2.0″ fronts, especially the continued democratization of publishing (UGC). That is the metaphorical forest I’m talking about, which will continue to grow and grow regardless of an economic shakeout.
August 2nd, 2007 at
Further — you may feel over-saturated with UGC, but the creators don’t. This is how kids communicate and express themselves today. That’s not going to stop.
August 2nd, 2007 at
@Mike Berkley: I don’t disagree with you at all then.
As far as I can tell, the Internet and all the wonderful things it has created goes in 5 year boom and busts cycles. I know that there is only really 13 years or so to measure this against, but if I’m right, we’re entering into our next bust stage, we are just finishing a boom now.
1995 - 2000 2000 - 2005 2005 - 2010
The next two years will continue to have quite a few plays, but the initial ‘boom’ with MySpace, YouTube etc has already passed by.
What I do disagree with is about how the kids communicate and express themselves. This is a fad, a growth of sorts, one that the next generation will break free from. My daughter (4 years old) can already navigate around the Nick Jr website and play her Dora games (they are educational). By the time she reaches her teen years, there won’t even be novelty to her anymore, it will be just another thing, like the telephone is to us.
Most of us are viewing all of this through the eyes of individuals who remember before the Internet. While those in their teens now were around before the Internet, they are part of the current ‘awe’ they are the guinea pigs. The next generation won’t give half as much attention to online profiles.
What will they be interested in? I’m not sure, but I hope it’s about getting outside, communicating in the physical realm and helping to make things better.
We are in the age of discussion, hopefully next is the age of action.
August 2nd, 2007 at
Yeah, he’s old. Old people suck right? They have nothing useful to say at all. Marshall is cool because he’s 30!
Um…wait a minute, he’s getting kinda old too. In just 10 short years he’ll be 40! Why do we need some old person like Marshall telling us what he thinks? Who cares what he thinks! He’s old!
Besides, I don’t think my computer is Web 2.0 compatible, I think it’s still on Web 1.0. How do I upgrade to Web 2.0? Do I need like The Linux to use 2.0? Do I call my ISP and ask them if they support Web 2.0? Is there any other way we can call this idiotic thing something other than “Web 2.0″?
August 2nd, 2007 at
Right on Marshall…you’re RIGHT on the target!
I too am a “new media consultant” and like you if there is another bubble then I would be hit hard after promoting things like Web 2.0 and how things are going in the right direction. So, like you, I’ve been burying my head in the sand because my livelihood depends so much on Web 2.0 and New Media.
Keep up the good fight because maybe we’ll still have work if we just pretend the bubble isn’t coming. Good job!
August 2nd, 2007 at
I certainly do not hope or wish for another bubble to burst. But your rant reads to me like “what’s that old fart know?”
August 2nd, 2007 at
Here’s a good article that points out differences between this bubble and the last: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2006/10/15/BUBBLE.TMP
August 2nd, 2007 at
@10668844: I hear you and I’m glad we agree on some level. But as you may guess, I do not agree with you that online socialization is a fad. While the particular brand names (MySpace, YouTube, etc) may be fads, the deep-seated need for connection and self-expression are not fads, and I believe the web will continue to make fulfilling these needs easier, more immediate, and ever more satisfying.
I believe the next generation will be even MORE immersed in online community, not less. The fact that your 4 year old daughter is already so immersed online, to the point where she simply takes it for granted, is an argument that this web thing has some serious inertia and won’t be reversed or even slowed down very easily at all.
Finally, I am nature enthusiast and I’m married to a wildlife naturalist. Getting outside is very important to me — and I sure as hell hope it will be for my brand new son. I do not think social media and nature (or outdoors education) are necessarily at odds with each other. But this is something we do have to be mindful of.
Thanks for the discussion.
August 2nd, 2007 at
One thing is certain:
There will be a “crash”, the cream will rise to the top and we will all move on.
Jim
New Media Consultant
August 2nd, 2007 at
The number one thing heard right before every bubble bursts is “This time it’s different.”
I think Dvorak is just saying that it’s NOT different this time and I would agree that the whole social-networking thing is out of countrol.
How many countless invitations to connect or “be friends” on countless websites can we all stand before we decide enough already?
August 2nd, 2007 at
Hi Marshall - you really rock!
Didn’t they say things like this originally about the internet as a whole?
Fine post! From one of your faithful twitter followers here in ye ole UK!
August 2nd, 2007 at
well said.
August 2nd, 2007 at
This sentence makes you lose all credibility: “Everyone can appreciate the awesomeness that is the emerging web of user generated content, online video and countless other paradigm shifting innovations.” Especially when you try to make a serious point using words like “awesomeness.” And frankly, no, we all don’t find it quite that extraordinary.
August 2nd, 2007 at
overstated to say the least
August 2nd, 2007 at
Patricia, sounds like you could use some more “awesomeness” in your life. For the highly discerning, I recommend the art and dance channels on Stumble Upon Video. http://video.stumbleupon.com Lots of good stuff there!
August 2nd, 2007 at
Goodness you rock. I was going to write about it, but why, you already did so to the perfect point.
August 2nd, 2007 at
Web 2.0 paradigm is here to stay.
But I think Dvorak was just ranting about over-proliferation. That’s natural. There will be consolidation. I didn’t get the sense that he was saying that the paradigm is flawed. Just that the economics are a bit inflated right now, which may be true for some of the sites out there. Clearly they can’t ALL survive on advertising (although many will and the ad-supported revenue model may be here to stay).
There might be some over-valuation going on right now too.
I think Dvorak and Marshall are both hyper-ranting a bit.
August 2nd, 2007 at
[…] John Dvorak set off a Web firestorm today when he declared that the Web 2.0 “bubble” is coming and that the end is near. Sometimes TechCrunch writer, Marshall Kirkpatrick and Robert Scoble took Dvorack to task on their respective blogs. Hundreds of other joined in. Ouch. […]
August 2nd, 2007 at
[…] Oder wie es Marshall Kirkpatrick ausdrückt: […]
August 2nd, 2007 at
Portland public transportation is a good place to think… Marshall has it right, actual value is being delivered to people with these new services, unlike the past ‘boom’ where the major advance was being able to pay (alot) more for dog food to have it delivered, and pay some of your parking tickets online.
As a side note, this post kind of reminds me of The Who song My Generation…
August 2nd, 2007 at
@10668844: You do realize that Club Penguin makes $35 million a year in revenue right? A 10x multiplier sounds about right to me, especially since it’s a monster social network for kids. Just because you have no idea what it is and don’t use it doesn’t mean it’s not a valuable piece of internet real estate.
August 2nd, 2007 at
Usually, I think of Dvorak as that lovable curmudgeon from TWiT. This post, on the other hand, goes a little too far…and regarding the first boom - less than 33% of my tech services company were in the work force back in that first bubble. Sorry, John. That post of his was sorta wrong from word one.
August 2nd, 2007 at
IgnoreJohnDvorak.He’satroll.Cananybodysay”attentionseekingbehavior”?
August 2nd, 2007 at
[…] My favorite title as well as Dvorak descriptor is from Marshall Kirkpatrick. He says "Cranky Geek and long respected old dude" "isn’t just cranky, he’s cranky and wrong." […]
August 2nd, 2007 at
You don’t have to be that old to remember the original bubble and it wasn’t actually that drastic in terms of how it impacted the economy in real terms. I can’t think of many deserving players that went under. Back then, it was a much-needed correction. If the same thing happens again, it’ll be a) smaller and b) no bad thing. I sympathise with your post - but I think it’s a bit of an over-reaction to a rather hysterical piece by Dvorak.
August 3rd, 2007 at
[…] Following John Dvorak’s Bubble 2.0 article (commented on yesterday), I note some responses have already appeared: Marshal Kirkpatrick, Rex Dixon and Robert Scoble all have dismissive posts. The drift of their arguments, however, seems to be based on rates and levels of adoption. That is, with so many people using Facebook, MySpace, Twitter, and so on, they will surely be with us for ever. Hmm, I recall a time in the late 70s when everyone in the world seemed to be wearing flared trousers; five years later, nobody was. Fashion. […]
August 3rd, 2007 at
[…] Then, I was drawn into the debate on Marshall Kirkpatrick’s site, sparked by John Dvorak’s comments about whether the Web 2.0 world was due a crash. […]
August 3rd, 2007 at
@Mike Rundle:
A 10x multiplier for something that is unsure of where it’s sustained growth is going to come from? I’ll admit, the 700,000 users x $5.95 a month + little extras is a very good model, but it is not worth anything close to $350M at it’s current developmental point.
I’m incredibly happy for the team that built the site and their handsome payday, but I will believe until the world proves me wrong that this is an over valuation based largely on ‘future’ earnings. I understand supply and demand, if someone is willing to pay the price, you sell it.
However, if I were Disney, I’d have been asking myself this, how long is it Penguins that kids want to be? How long until someone comes out with something more appealing, how long….
We are in an area of unrealistic pricing based on a current advertising/marketing surge, that’s the long and short of it. We have reached a new level of development, and as others have been saying, the extra will get trimmed.
btw - the line “Just because you have no idea what it is and don’t use it” is getting tired - it almost upset me, if I hadn’t read it so much over the past 10 years.
In closing, this has been a very good discussion, I thank Marshall and all of those who posted for creating it.
August 3rd, 2007 at
[…] Point. Counterpoint. […]
August 3rd, 2007 at
Well, I’d rather understand and use things like routers, TCP/IP Protocol stack, Assembly, Processor OpCodes, Network Administration, and the like, rather than shitty Web 2.0 services that are here today, gone tomorrow.
I’ll always have a job. Always. Web 2.0? Meh, it’s garbage.
August 3rd, 2007 at
“This time it’s different. You don’t understand Tulips. People will always want beautiful things.”
- Tulip Investor, 1636
“This time it’s different. You don’t understand Asia. People will always seek to trade.”
- South Sea Company Investor, 1720
“This time it’s different. You don’t understand land. People will always need houses.”
- UK property investor, 1880, 1989
- Japanese property investor, 1985
- Californian property investor, 2006
“This time it’s different. You don’t understand the Internet. It will change everything.”
- Tech investor, 1999
“This time it’s different. You don’t understand Social Networks. Kids will grow up with this stuff.”
- Web 2.0 investor, 2007
Well, guess what…
People still:
- want beautiful things
- want to trade
- need homes
- use the Internet
- generate their own content
Of course, none of these stopped the first four (eight) crashes…
… but heh, it’s your money.
Yes, Web2.0 will replace 1.0.
Yes, most companies currently out there will be out of business in 20 years time.
August 3rd, 2007 at
[…] Marshall Kirkpatrick thinks he’s wrong and cranky, Dietrich Kappe thinks his argument doesn’t hold water, Digg people think the only thing bubbling is his ego, but Dvorak insists it’s “It’s déjà vu all over again”. […]
August 5th, 2007 at
[…] John Dvorak isn’t just cranky, he’s cranky and wrong - Marshall Kirkpatrick - Aug 2007 Kirkpatrick(2007)JohnDvorak-CrankyAndWrong.pdf (note:no comments) (tags: socialmedia) […]
August 6th, 2007 at
When it comes to the stock market, we might see a swing, but as far as business is concerned, we will see more and more opportunities with social networks. More and more are popping up each day. Even brainstorming has hit web 2.0. Check out http://www.brainreactions.net and brainstorm with other innovators.
August 6th, 2007 at
[…] John C. Dvorak seems to think that Web 2.0 is a bubble. Of course, leave it to John to raise peoples’ hackles; I love how he can get a rise out of people. Of course, there are people who feel otherwise like Marshall Kirkpatrick and Rex Dixon. We’ll see Dvorak back up a bit and then explain in further detail why he is right and why people are overreacting to him. I would say that Dvorak is right. He left enough wiggle room in his writing to explain that all the Web 2.0 is a phase that will die down and lead to something new. Let’s keep that in mind while I jump to the next topic. […]
August 7th, 2007 at
The ‘old’ fart is at it again.
August 9th, 2007 at
[…] John C. Dvorak says we’re in Bubble 2.0, Marshall Kirkpatrick says it’s different this time. They’re both right. […]
August 10th, 2007 at
“Dvorak should have argued that fear of brand damage by UGC is a threat to the web 2.0 economy - I think it’s one of the most viable threats, in fact.”
In the early days of NASCAR, companies did not want to advertise on the race cars for fear of brand damage. They didn’t want their logo hurtling across the track in a flaming heap of metal. But look at NASCAR now, it’s one of the hottest sponsorships out there.
Once there is an audience, fears of brand damage subside.
August 13th, 2007 at
[…] My favorite title as well as Dvorak descriptor is from Marshall Kirkpatrick. He says "Cranky Geek and long respected old dude" "isn’t just cranky, he’s cranky and wrong." […]
August 14th, 2007 at
[…] I’m actually in a camp that disagrees with most of what Mr. Dvorak has to say (like Marshall), but I’ll play along. Let’s say the bubble is only a year or two away from bursting and imagine how that hypothetical world would function. […]
September 5th, 2007 at
I feel Dvorak is correct in some points !!!
As marshall is correct !!
Can anyone explain to me if there are 50 sites offering the same service, can all of them survive ?
There are very few web 2.0 sites which have the potential to survive. I think majority of them will lose the business.
Here the people who are praising Doesnt know anything about the BUSINESS.
They are thinking that whatever they make, people are going to use it surely.
PEOPLE WHO DONT KNOW BUSINESS WILL SUPPORT WEB 2.0
October 2nd, 2007 at
Guys…it sure looks like a bubble. Economists are saying it looks like the start of a bubble.
The problem is, the economy is heating up in Tech, again, for two reasons…first because the dollar is CHEAP, second, investors are hoping that things go well. We’ve been down so long, that people are finally becoming optimistic. It’s called HOPING, wishful thinking. The problem is this heating up and optimism has no basis in reality. Stocks in Tech are heating up…but WHY? What’s new? What’s changed? Meanwhile, VC’s are doing their money thing, again. It looks like dot.com 2.0, only it’s being built on the foundation of mega-government debt (unlike before when we had a rather fiscally conservative prez in the White House) not to mention the weak, wobbly, and downright frightening outlook on the combined fronts: housing/financial/banking/credit
What you are seeing in the SF Bay area is NOT what the rest of the country is seeing. You are myopic, I’m afraid.
I see THIS bubble breaking in a few years. I don’t see where Dvorak is wrong. Maybe you guys are too young to have any kind of “long term” perspective on this, and/or are just hoping….however, expect a “fun ride” and, try to keep in mind that bubbles, while fun, burst at the least opportune moment.
October 3rd, 2007 at
[…] Inutile dire che per chi (mi ci metto anch’io) sostiene la causa del web sociale spesso con entusiasmo un po’ “aprioristico”, queste critiche mosse da più fonti fanno riflettere. Non si tratta a mio giudizio né di respingerle con sdegno né di accoglierle con un atteggiamento di delusione. Occorre prenderne atto e capire eventualmente dove e cosa poter migliorare, individuando i possibili scenari futuri. E’ un discorso chiaramente aperto, ma vorrei in questo senso dire la mia. Per cominciare spesso si commette l’errore di analizzare fenomeni tecnologici e mediali dimenticando l’UOMO. Questo vale sia in fase di progettazione dei media stessi, sia quando si analizzano gli effetti negativi. L’uomo ha due bisogni fondamentali, che non hanno nulla a che vedere col Web: -Il bisogno di costruire e “promuovere” la propria identità -Il bisogno di socializzare e condividere questa identità, fatta di carattere, passioni ed esperienze con i suoi “simili”, persone che ritiene affini a sé Le strategie e le azioni mediante le quali l’uomo ricerca la soddisfazioni di questi bisogni sono le più varie: si passa dagli illuminati ai falsi profeti, dai talentuosi ai superficiali, dagli onesti ai furbi. E poi ci sono i timidi, i riservati. Tantissimi, più di quanti si immagina. Non tutti partecipano con entusiasmo, non tutti sono disposti a mettersi in gioco, a condividere le proprie ragioni. Il Web (sociale o no) riflette l’uomo, questo è chiaro. Coi suoi difetti, le sue aspirazioni, i suoi modi di intendere la vita. Abbiamo solo aumentato infinitamente le possibilità e lo spazio, ridotto a zero i tempi, ma non abbiamo ancora cambiato l’uomo. Non si può quindi pretendere che nascano 100 blog interessanti su 100, che partecipino tutti gli utenti, che le idee e i progetti siano tutti vincenti. Si è cominciato, tumultuosamente, a capire che Internet non è solo un repository di informazioni ma soprattutto un territorio dove avvengono relazioni sociali, virtuali sì, ma pur sempre umane. Per com’è la società attuale (e anche qui la tecnologia e il web c’entrano poco) c’è chi fiuta l’affare, chi se ne approfitta, chi investe soldi senza un motivo concreto, chi utilizza Internet solo per esibizionismo. In una fase di passaggio come questa continueranno a essere prodotti contenuti di scarsa qualità, continueranno a esserci scettici e scarsi frequentatori, continueranno a esserci speculatori e intenti egemonici da parte dei grandi gruppi editoriali. Ma l’innovazione c’è ed è concreta, sotto gli occhi di tutti, non si può negarlo. Ciò che serve per coinvolgere più utenti e spingerli a partecipare e condividere il SE’ (e su questo sono assolutamente d’accordo con le contro-critiche di Marshall Kirkpatrick e di Maurizio Goetz, è puntare sulla REALE utilità degli strumenti (anche se poi è il mercato stesso che effettua il filtro) e soprattutto su una sempre più spinta umanizzazione delle interfacce: abbiamo ottimi intenti ma strumenti ancora immaturi. Occorre puntare sull’uomo. E alla fine, vincerà (anche economicamente) chi avrà capito che il Web è solo un estensione della mente umana, offrendo i mezzi più adatti per far emergere quella chimera che chiamiamo “intelligenza collettiva”. […]
October 27th, 2007 at
[…] John Dvorak is an old-fashioned tech journalist who thinks we’re going to have another dotcom bust:"Every single person working in the media today who experienced the dot-com bubble in 1999 to 2000 believes that we are going through the exact same process and can expect the exact same results—a bust…Today everything from YouTube to the local church has a social-networking angle. And this doesn’t even consider the actual social-networking sites, from MySpace to LinkedIn to Facebook to even Second Life. This scene is totally out of control and will contribute to the collapse for sure."Marshal Kirkpatrick is a startup guy and a former TechCrunch writer who calls bluff on this nonsense:"I say: Social networking is an emerging utility that combines the functionality of blogging’s self publishing with the usefulness of email list serves. Social networking services make these activities more accessible than ever before… Why on earth is this man considered a leading voice on tech? I’m guessing that it’s because he speaks to the potent paranoia of much of the aging population - afraid in the face of a changing, confusing world that they will face humiliation if they bet on new tech, that they will be unemployed if things take a downturn or that they will lose their self-righteous know-it-all credentials if this new economy does succeed."Amen. Tags: Web 2.0 , bubble , social networking […]