<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"><channel><title>The Inquisitr - Latest Comments in Top 20 Web 2.0 Services</title><link>http://inquisitr.disqus.com/</link><description></description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Wed, 04 Feb 2009 00:29:46 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Top 20 Web 2.0 Services</title><link>http://www.inquisitr.com/2165/top-20-web-20-services/#comment-5829016</link><description>Hitwise is a terrible way to count. This is a company that's paid to use some measure. So if MySpace is one of these 1500 clients that pay Hitwise to do statistics, I cry foul!!!</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Tommy</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 04 Feb 2009 00:29:46 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Top 20 Web 2.0 Services</title><link>http://www.inquisitr.com/2165/top-20-web-20-services/#comment-1104823</link><description>Well-said...even if you're calling us all abnormal. :-)</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">JRRaphael</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 05 Aug 2008 16:02:10 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Top 20 Web 2.0 Services</title><link>http://www.inquisitr.com/2165/top-20-web-20-services/#comment-1104608</link><description>note that ALL of these (except maybe gaia online) have always been targetted at "normal" people.  the twitters and friendfeeds and diggs of the world have an audience of white male computer professionals, and that deters the masses from joining in.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;lesson:  if a small 2.0 service is big on techcrunch and scoble, it's not going to be big on the whole internet.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">girlgerms</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 05 Aug 2008 15:41:26 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Top 20 Web 2.0 Services</title><link>http://www.inquisitr.com/2165/top-20-web-20-services/#comment-1103936</link><description>As you can see from my FriendFeed comment, I extracted that information from the Hitwise item. Thanks for bringing it up front.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">ontarioemperor</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 05 Aug 2008 14:31:43 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Top 20 Web 2.0 Services</title><link>http://www.inquisitr.com/2165/top-20-web-20-services/#comment-1102715</link><description>Ontario, good question.  I should have included in the original post that the stats were based only on U.S. visits to the sites last month.  Post is updated to reflect that.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">JRRaphael</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 05 Aug 2008 12:39:24 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Top 20 Web 2.0 Services</title><link>http://www.inquisitr.com/2165/top-20-web-20-services/#comment-1102587</link><description>An interesting study, and one that reminds us that the vast majority of the world doesn't care if FriendFeed goes down for a few hours. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;I would like to dig into the relative statistics for MySpace vs. Facebook, and what criteria were used to rank MySpace so much higher than Facebook - were there geographical considerations? Usage considerations?</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">ontarioemperor</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 05 Aug 2008 12:27:29 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>