Web 2.0 is different than Web 1.0 from a user perspective. A passive, fixed website (like ones created before 2003) does not allow interaction like watching a television program or video. An interactive, immersive website can pump the creative juices.
Sorry, maybe there's no difference between Web 2.0 and Web 1.0 to you or adults, but from a young child's perspective a Web 2.0 world is different. The Internet is not the same static, fixed medium it once was. It is constantly growing and evolving but many adults stick to the same websites due to the lack of time, energy, etc. as you've pointed out.
There's nothing wrong with revenue-generating proprietary systems. That's called capitalism. It's your choice to pay money. It's your choice to use Google or not. It's your time, money, energy. It's your decision. Yes, adults have to make a living.
People are using Web 2.0 tools like Facebook and Twitter in very creative ways; the food truck movement, for instance, is using it to reach out to their customers and notify their daily whereabouts.
Open source is an alternative. That's the free market.
Here's the interesting part though, even the profit-generating, proprietary systems are starting to offer FREE basic services. I recently tried out video mail (
www.eyejot.com). Eyejot offers free accounts, but if you want more advanced features and services then you've got to pay for it, which is fair.
