Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Every time you click this link, it will send you to a random Web 1.0 website

wiby.me

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 374 posts

Re: Every time you click this link, it will send you to a random Web 1.0 website

#241

Post by antigonemerlin »

s1artibartfast wrote: post #166
3cats-in-a-coat wrote: post #103

I actually love this, and I bookmarked it. Why? Not just because of nostalgia. Web 1.0 sites had a different set of UI idioms, which seem unintuitive to us, as we're too set in our new ways now. If you get past the fact they're ugly by modern standards, you'll see these sites accomplishing amazing results through startlingly simple means. It's an excellent source of inspiration, and if you combine those ideas with mo…

I still don't believe modern we design is actually preferred by the masses. Ofen times it isn't even a balance between aesthetics an clarity, because the modern pages are broken or otherwise unusable. It has gotten to the point where I wonder if maybe I'm not neurotypical. I'll take sites formatted like Craigslist 100% of the time. Now I'm just waiting for windows OS to fully replace file navigation text with iconogr…

I think at the end of the day, it's because the modern way of designing things is just easier for developers.

I remember when that started taking off; it was honestly kind of a godsend because one of the laziest way of doing things suddenly became associated with professionalism. On the other hand, it's getting pretty bland as a consumer now that every site is doing it.

Compared to images as buttons of the 2000s, something adjacent to material design seriously cuts down on the number of graphical assets necessary for develop anything. Even games seem to follow that trend: compare Crusader Kings 2 vs Crusader Kings 3, with image buttons vs a general UI toolkit in the two games.

Re: Every time you click this link, it will send you to a random Web 1.0 website

#242

Post by antigonemerlin »

devjab wrote: post #237
mulmen wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Vast swaths of the population are uninteresting rubes. Reddit, Facebook, and Twitter are all doing us a favor by keeping those people occupied and their drivel contained.

Isn’t hacker news doing the same thing for the most parts? This is a little rude but I went through your history and maybe you should be more careful who you call “uninteresting rubes” and “drivel”. Don't get me wrong, I don't think you're in the category. I don't think anyone is. I'm just poking a little at your self awareness and your lack of respect toward your fellow people. I do think there is an issue with the…

Speaking as someone else, I go on reddit because there are occasional domain experts. It's 99% repetitive drivel (I myself am guilty of the same) and 1% person who actually knows what they're talking about.

That number is proportional to %experts/%non-experts, and is inversely correlated with the size of a subreddit (though the AskHistorians subreddit remains an excellent exception), and is the reason why the NonCredibleDefense is usually more credible than the CredibleDefense.

I personally drifted to hackernews from reddit as a general "reddit", but I find it's probably wise to take with a grain of salt the legal/maths/physics/economics/"anything not related to computer science" opinions of the people here. It's probably a good general rule of thumb to only take advice from experts in their domains.

Re: Every time you click this link, it will send you to a random Web 1.0 website

#243

Post by aerio »

oefrha wrote: post #205
aerio wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see you haven't run into one heavily utilizing tables for layout yet.

Fun fact: you're commenting on a site that uses tables for layout. It's not an unholy mess though, as it doesn't have sidebars or other really complicated stuff.

Hence the inclusion of "heavily".

Re: Every time you click this link, it will send you to a random Web 1.0 website

#245

Post by RuggedPineapple »

s1artibartfast wrote: post #166
3cats-in-a-coat wrote: post #103

I actually love this, and I bookmarked it. Why? Not just because of nostalgia. Web 1.0 sites had a different set of UI idioms, which seem unintuitive to us, as we're too set in our new ways now. If you get past the fact they're ugly by modern standards, you'll see these sites accomplishing amazing results through startlingly simple means. It's an excellent source of inspiration, and if you combine those ideas with mo…

I still don't believe modern we design is actually preferred by the masses. Ofen times it isn't even a balance between aesthetics an clarity, because the modern pages are broken or otherwise unusable. It has gotten to the point where I wonder if maybe I'm not neurotypical. I'll take sites formatted like Craigslist 100% of the time. Now I'm just waiting for windows OS to fully replace file navigation text with iconogr…

When I discovered there's a live mirror of Wikipedia on the Gopher protocol I discovered I prefer reading it that way.

Re: Every time you click this link, it will send you to a random Web 1.0 website

#246

Post by tlogan »

3cats-in-a-coat wrote: post #103

I actually love this, and I bookmarked it. Why? Not just because of nostalgia. Web 1.0 sites had a different set of UI idioms, which seem unintuitive to us, as we're too set in our new ways now. If you get past the fact they're ugly by modern standards, you'll see these sites accomplishing amazing results through startlingly simple means. It's an excellent source of inspiration, and if you combine those ideas with mo…

Yes - they are quite easy to navigate. All information is there and clearly labeled.

While they may not be aesthetically pleasing, it's important to remember that asthetic is all about fashion.

Re: Every time you click this link, it will send you to a random Web 1.0 website

#247

Post by gxs »

s1artibartfast wrote: post #166
3cats-in-a-coat wrote: post #103

I actually love this, and I bookmarked it. Why? Not just because of nostalgia. Web 1.0 sites had a different set of UI idioms, which seem unintuitive to us, as we're too set in our new ways now. If you get past the fact they're ugly by modern standards, you'll see these sites accomplishing amazing results through startlingly simple means. It's an excellent source of inspiration, and if you combine those ideas with mo…

I still don't believe modern we design is actually preferred by the masses. Ofen times it isn't even a balance between aesthetics an clarity, because the modern pages are broken or otherwise unusable. It has gotten to the point where I wonder if maybe I'm not neurotypical. I'll take sites formatted like Craigslist 100% of the time. Now I'm just waiting for windows OS to fully replace file navigation text with iconogr…

Agrre 100%.

The fact that the back button is completely useless now (at least on mobile) because every website wants to refresh every time you go back is probably one of the worst things to happen to web navigation in a long time.

Horrendous experience and it leaves me fumbling with opening everything in new tabs which can get super messy/annoying on a phone.

Re: Every time you click this link, it will send you to a random Web 1.0 website

#248

Post by hutzlibu »

tlogan wrote: post #246
3cats-in-a-coat wrote: post #103

I actually love this, and I bookmarked it. Why? Not just because of nostalgia. Web 1.0 sites had a different set of UI idioms, which seem unintuitive to us, as we're too set in our new ways now. If you get past the fact they're ugly by modern standards, you'll see these sites accomplishing amazing results through startlingly simple means. It's an excellent source of inspiration, and if you combine those ideas with mo…

Yes - they are quite easy to navigate. All information is there and clearly labeled. While they may not be aesthetically pleasing, it's important to remember that asthetic is all about fashion.

Well, up to a certain point. Some of those flashy gifs on those old sites really hurt my eyes.

Re: Every time you click this link, it will send you to a random Web 1.0 website

#249

Post by 8n4vidtmkvmk »

3cats-in-a-coat wrote: post #103

I actually love this, and I bookmarked it. Why? Not just because of nostalgia. Web 1.0 sites had a different set of UI idioms, which seem unintuitive to us, as we're too set in our new ways now. If you get past the fact they're ugly by modern standards, you'll see these sites accomplishing amazing results through startlingly simple means. It's an excellent source of inspiration, and if you combine those ideas with mo…

They don't seem unintuitive to me, maybe because I grew up with 1.0. these youngsters are creating buttons without outlines, links that are grey and not underlined, checkboxes that slide and sometimes have no other indication that they're on or off, and many other unholy idioms. Web 1.0 was glorious.

Re: Every time you click this link, it will send you to a random Web 1.0 website

#250

Post by gxs »

As a kid, I found windows to be extremely intuitive - no matter what I was doing, if I thought something was possible, the feature would always be exactly where I’d expect to be.

And by windows I mean windows and the desktop applications of the time. They worked well and adhered to the same ui principles, vs every saas tool now that does its own thing. Even the fabled UX of macs never compared to me, I always thought their design was overrated. (Not today, of course).

Something about UI designers back then was just different - they really seemed to prioritize putting everything in its place vs trying to make everything wow you/look good. Everything was organized very logically.

Today, a lot of websites are terrible. I’m not being overly dramatic, there are still a lot that are fine or even good, but so many are garbage. They hijack/break standard browser functionality (cut/paste, scroll bars/behavior, right click, etc.) and the UI itself can be frustrating. You might be able to quickly tell what’s clickable vs not, what’s expandable/collapsible vs not, bad text/contrast, etc etc.

Post reply on HN