History
The history of mashup can be backtracked by first understanding the broader context of the history of the Web. For Web 1.0 business model, companies stored consumer data on portals and updated them regularly. They controlled all the consumer data, and the consumer had to use their products and services to get the information.
With the advent of Web 2.0 a new proposition was created, using Web standards that were commonly and widely adopted across traditional competitors and unlocked the consumer data. At the same time, mashups emerged allowing mixing and matching competitor's API to create new services.
The term isn't formally defined by any standard-setting body.
The first mashups used mapping services or photo services to combine these services with data of any kind and therefore create visualizations of the data. In the beginning, most mashups were consumer-based, but recently the mashup is to be seen as an interesting concept useful also to enterprises. Business mashups can combine existing internal data with external services to create new views on the data.
Mashups are in the ascendant. As a statistic from Programmable Web found out in 2009 that three new mashups have been registered every single day for the last two years.
Read more about this topic: Mashup (digital)
Famous quotes containing the word history:
“Postmodernism is, almost by definition, a transitional cusp of social, cultural, economic and ideological history when modernism’s high-minded principles and preoccupations have ceased to function, but before they have been replaced with a totally new system of values. It represents a moment of suspension before the batteries are recharged for the new millennium, an acknowledgment that preceding the future is a strange and hybrid interregnum that might be called the last gasp of the past.”
—Gilbert Adair, British author, critic. Sunday Times: Books (London, April 21, 1991)
“Regarding History as the slaughter-bench at which the happiness of peoples, the wisdom of States, and the virtue of individuals have been victimized—the question involuntarily arises—to what principle, to what final aim these enormous sacrifices have been offered.”
—Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770–1831)
“To summarize the contentions of this paper then. Firstly, the phrase ‘the meaning of a word’ is a spurious phrase. Secondly and consequently, a re-examination is needed of phrases like the two which I discuss, ‘being a part of the meaning of’ and ‘having the same meaning.’ On these matters, dogmatists require prodding: although history indeed suggests that it may sometimes be better to let sleeping dogmatists lie.”
—J.L. (John Langshaw)