Web 2.0

Although the term seems to suggest a new version of the World Wide Web, it does not refer to an update to any technical specifications, but to changes in the ways application developers and end-users perceive and use the internet.

Web 2.0 applications tend to interact much more with the end-user. With web 2.0, the end-user is no more just a user of the application but an active contributor of content and an integral part of the data driving the application, whether it is through Blogging (blogger), creating articles through Wiki (wikipedia), tagging contents (del.ico.us, digg, technorati), providing content (flickr, youtube, twitter) or doing Podcast.

Social nature of these web 2.0 applications have become phenomenally successful, allowing the application to leverage on the user-driven data (orkut).

So, that would lead us to ask what Web 1.0 is right? There was no Web 1.0 until Web 2.0. In other words, Web 1.0 was coined to differentiate existing applications from Web 2.0. Web 1.0 had static content which, according to Berners-Lee, could be considered the "read-only web". In other words, the early web allowed us to search for information and read it. There was very little in the way of user interaction or content contribution.

Web 2.0, would be "read-write" web if we stick to Berners-Lee's method of describing it.
For example, Kodakexpress is Web 1.0, while Flickr is Web 2.0

So, what next? Web 3.0, ofcourse! :)

The Web 3.0 would be something akin to a "read-write-execute" web.

Web 2.0 or 3.0, you don't need to upgrade anything or get new software. These are abstract ideas used to contemplate how the web applications are evolving from the perspective of application developers and end-users, in how they use the internet.