81–90 of 113 posts
Just for the record, I want to point out that it does not render well on Netscape Communicator 4.75. http://grab.by/QH2u
Ok fine, I get what you were trying to say. :)
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netscape_(web_browser)#Release...
For anyone who might not have been following Dave Winer's work, or thought streams in the recent past, the reference to blogging like it's 1999 isn't about the tech. It's primary concept is about it going back to the roots of being about openness. Instead of blogging on all the closed platforms, Dave has always advocated for blogging on your own terms. Whether from wordpress, ghost, or his new tool, it's all the same…
No platform is forever, except maybe the one you maybe help be that way.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oh my god. Frames. The horror... We used to append content into a single page because the alternatives were A) independent post files and a cgi script to concatenate them dynamically on each view, or B) re-create the static page from individual post files. Since using a database was totally overkill, and static + individual posts wasted precious megabytes, and a new dynamic process per page load was way too CPU-inten…
A CGI script to cat the posts together sounds like the better option. Wasn't this the sort of thing that PHP was literally invented to do? Upon saying that, I have no idea what the state of PHP was in 1999.
PHP did develop quickly in order to optimize the performance of serving scripted web content. Besides its own performance enhancements it also relied heavily on database storage for content, which significantly improved performance for complex websites.
But it was mostly useless to people with just a homepage and guestbook; most web hosters would not provide database access without charging, and most web devs needed a higher level of technical competency to use them. A lot of websites were run by people who only knew front-end programming and markup languages.
sounded interesting, until I selected 'view page source' on one of the pages and saw a screen full of .js not really very 1999ish.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A CGI script to cat the posts together sounds like the better option. Wasn't this the sort of thing that PHP was literally invented to do? Upon saying that, I have no idea what the state of PHP was in 1999.
Nah, it was too CPU intense. In addition, even though disks haven't gotten significantly faster since then, filesystems were a lot less advanced, and disk, virtual memory and CPU caches were much smaller. PHP did develop quickly in order to optimize the performance of serving scripted web content. Besides its own performance enhancements it also relied heavily on database storage for content, which significantly impr…
> most web devs needed a higher level of technical competency
> websites were run by people who only knew front-end programming and markup languages
That was exactly my situation
When I was blogging in 1999 it involved appending each new blog entry to the top of the html page which went in the content frame. And I don't think I'd heard of "blogging" yet.
Oh my god. Frames. The horror... We used to append content into a single page because the alternatives were A) independent post files and a cgi script to concatenate them dynamically on each view, or B) re-create the static page from individual post files. Since using a database was totally overkill, and static + individual posts wasted precious megabytes, and a new dynamic process per page load was way too CPU-inten…
That same server was also my email server.
Then again, I wrote my own blogging engine in C [1] (and still use it).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Reminds me of the "frozen in time" NBA Jam site ... with Google analytics.
Do you mean the SpaceJam website? http://www.warnerbros.com/archive/spacejam/movie/jam.htm I go here every now and then. Not sure why.
someone else mentioned ghost, and i'm posting mainly to link that project
https://github.com/TryGhost/Ghost
and thank the author b/c i learned a lot a/b node development from it.