Not on a software level (that doesn’t mean a lot without a standard platform) as it is usually being discussed but ‘exactly’ on a ‘hardware’ level – the Internet usage has got a boost only on a standard Intel x86 PC platform availability for users along with the rise of Windows applications development on this platform in the mid-90s.

Such high-quality service requires maximum screen area for simultaneous placing of navigation tools (ads) and content for developers and comfort for users accessing it. Let’s compare an iPhone and the Cell PC (two connected touch-sensitive displays using a standard MotoRAZR form factor) – dimensions – 61×115 and 53×103 mm – screen area – the Cell PC has 1.5 bigger than iPhone. Even new Intel Moorestown platform (42×145 mm) has smaller screen area than a Cell PC.

That’s the base for Mobile Web 2.0 development on a x86 architecture of Intel Silverthorne processor for porting fully-functional ‘desktop’ applications on the Cell PC platform.

iPhone is already an example of this type of porting in case of Mac OS X. As the fact of life. Next step – an efficient dual-display UI with a standard cell phone form factor to replace them for ‘every’ cell phone user. You know, nobody will do it unless the same compact device is offered. That’s real Mobile Web 2.0 – if anyone is concerned about information ubiquity right now. Microsoft? Google?

Don’t see how his concept of Web 3.0 fits into what has to be the most definitive definition of 1.0 and 2.0 yet, so I think it’s best to file under “up his own arse”