I haven't had a chance to watch the recording of the Davenport and McAfee debate, but the commentary so far is giving me some indication of what happened. Apparently it was all very friendly :-)
"amble evidence that there are pre-existing technologies that deliver what Andrew says Enterprise 2.0 'is the first to do' ... technologies that have been around for 15 years. My view is in line with Tom's view ... Enterprise 2.0 is merely the latest expression of various technology constructs that have been in other tools for a long time."
On the other hand Dennis Howlett comments:
"while I agree we’re at the very early stages of adoption, that’s not to say they’re a fad or an extension of what’s gone before. The new technologies are allowing us to think about how we collaborate, in what context and around which information. I was part of an analyst panel in 2001 where we discussed new ways to collaborate. At the time we had to acknowledge the tools didn’t exist - or at least not at a price point people would pay. And even then we could not have imagined the potential we see today. That has changed dramatically in the last couple of years. As has ease of use."
What do I think? For the moment I'm still sitting on the fence, but I'll post some specific comments soon...