OK, so I finally bothered to read what Web 2.0 is and it's not so bad. From the "authority" on the subject, O'Reilly:
In our initial brainstorming, we formulated our sense of Web 2.0 by example:
Web 1.0 Web 2.0 DoubleClick --> Google AdSense Ofoto --> Flickr Akamai --> BitTorrent mp3.com --> Napster Britannica Online --> Wikipedia personal websites --> blogging evite --> upcoming.org and EVDB domain name speculation --> search engine optimization page views --> cost per click screen scraping --> web services publishing --> participation content management systems --> wikis directories (taxonomy) --> tagging ("folksonomy") stickiness --> syndication
I saw an interesting presentation regarding the implications of "Web 2.0" in relation to "Identity 2.0" - not only great info, but also a highly entertaining presentation.
https://www.identity20.com/media/OSCON2005/
Thanks,
David
Web 1.0 was about connecting computers and making technology more efficient for computers. Yes, the sites and services work (and were top of the line in their own time) but you can't really talk about user experience or ease of use.
Web 2.0 is about connecting people, and making technology more efficient and transparent for people. Think for example blogging, and what it does automaticly for you: easy publishing, easy networking, easy syndication etc... And then compare it to making a classical homepage.
What Web2.0 as a name identifies is evolution - next step, enhancement. IMO it is a good buzzword that hopefully attracts people to step ahead into the new way of thinking, new way of making applications, new way of serving people, new way of networking, new way of working with data etc.