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

The Animatrix

intothematrix.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 44 posts

Re: The Animatrix

#31

Post by vectorjohn »

billyhoffman wrote: post #11

"View Source" on this home page is a fun/terrible time capsule into web development in 2001. 1- FRAMES! 2- Table based layout 3- Preloading image via JavaScript! In the no less! Screw start render time, we are doing this! 4- Opening links in new pop-up windows. Ahh the days before tabs.... 5- Swapping images with onmouseover, like some kind of an animal 6- Burning text into images to use a specific font 7- Browser sn…

It's funny because it isn't just that HTML(5) and better CSS support exist, it's just sloppy in general. Either it wasn't taken seriously at the time, or I don't know what.

On the other hand, it's a working site that gets the job done, no matter how embarrassing behind the scenes.

Re: The Animatrix

#33

Post by Scuds »

iMark wrote: post #3

Digital archeology is going to be an interesting field sooner or later, sooner from the looks of this. It's amusing to see the video sizes - "Large bandwidth 640x272" My, how times have changed...

What's the codec? mpeg-1, sorenson?

Re: The Animatrix

#34

Post by david_p »

billyhoffman wrote: post #11

"View Source" on this home page is a fun/terrible time capsule into web development in 2001. 1- FRAMES! 2- Table based layout 3- Preloading image via JavaScript! In the no less! Screw start render time, we are doing this! 4- Opening links in new pop-up windows. Ahh the days before tabs.... 5- Swapping images with onmouseover, like some kind of an animal 6- Burning text into images to use a specific font 7- Browser sn…

On the other hand, the sites still renders perfectly 14 years later.

It would be interesting to see how today's super-fancy-html5 javascript-everywhere no-tables Websites look in 14 years with a modern browser.

All the "terrible" techniques you mention actually do the job in a surprisingly time-robust way.

Engineering versus hype.

Re: The Animatrix

#35

Post by wodenokoto »

revscat wrote: post #9
Vexs wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To my mind, the animatrix was a better successor to the matrix than the sequels ever were. (Then again, just about anything would be.) It showcases the history of the matrix, pleads a case for the machine, and shows life in the matrix. It's an underwatched not-quite-masterpiece that is still excellent.

I recently re-watched the sequels and came to find myself puzzled by the amount of vitriol they receive. Can you explain what your objection to them were? I found them at least entertaining, and consistent with the original. They were by no means above criticism, but I certainly don't think they deserve the level of scorn you typically see.

They are probably not bad movies, and the high-way action scene is amazing, but I'm not really sure there was anything to those movies other than that.

When the first movie was so mind blowing (which it probably isn't today) then some good special effects a great action scene or two and mediocre story is not going to look like decent action movie, but more like an atrocity.

Re: The Animatrix

#36

Post by drzaiusapelord »

robogimp wrote: post #7

Internet old timer here, I watched these videos through this site on their release dates, AMA...

Me too, now it all seems so horribly pretentious and the entire series just some sexy veneer over a lot of milquetoast AI and information theory concepts.

The first movie still holds fairly well as a stand-alone. I feel there's a reason sci-fi creatives get reigned in by management often. Its to avoid sequalitis where movies become info dumping grounds for whatever books the director read recently. Frankly, I feel the series would have been better as a bunch of books instead of movies with a lot of 25 cent words tossed it. I feel embarrassed for the Watchowski's anytime "The Architect" is on-screen.

Re: The Animatrix

#37

Post by drzaiusapelord »

sp332 wrote: post #19
iMark wrote: post #3

Digital archeology is going to be an interesting field sooner or later, sooner from the looks of this. It's amusing to see the video sizes - "Large bandwidth 640x272" My, how times have changed...

Oh it already is, check out this blog about Geocities http://contemporary-home-computing.org/1tb/ And you can emulate so much software in your browser now, including rare stuff. In your browser - just click a link and play history. https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos_games If you want to help, first donate to the Internet Archive http://archive.org/donate/ then send your floppies and old CD-ROMS to Jaso…

I tried this and was hilariously stopped by 1980's DRM:

http://i.imgur.com/Z1HxVhU.png

Sure, I can find the manual somewhere, but its a PITA. Today's DRM in the future will not be this easy to overcome.

Re: The Animatrix

#38

Post by znpy »

david_p wrote: post #34
billyhoffman wrote: post #11

"View Source" on this home page is a fun/terrible time capsule into web development in 2001. 1- FRAMES! 2- Table based layout 3- Preloading image via JavaScript! In the no less! Screw start render time, we are doing this! 4- Opening links in new pop-up windows. Ahh the days before tabs.... 5- Swapping images with onmouseover, like some kind of an animal 6- Burning text into images to use a specific font 7- Browser sn…

On the other hand, the sites still renders perfectly 14 years later. It would be interesting to see how today's super-fancy-html5 javascript-everywhere no-tables Websites look in 14 years with a modern browser. All the "terrible" techniques you mention actually do the job in a surprisingly time-robust way. Engineering versus hype.

THIS. THIS. THIS. THIS. A MILLION TIMES THIS.

The source code is awful and crappy, but 14 years later it still renders.

Also if you save the page and load in the browser it will still load correctly.

Re: The Animatrix

#39

Post by sp332 »

drzaiusapelord wrote: post #37
sp332 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh it already is, check out this blog about Geocities http://contemporary-home-computing.org/1tb/ And you can emulate so much software in your browser now, including rare stuff. In your browser - just click a link and play history. https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos_games If you want to help, first donate to the Internet Archive http://archive.org/donate/ then send your floppies and old CD-ROMS to Jaso…

I tried this and was hilariously stopped by 1980's DRM: http://i.imgur.com/Z1HxVhU.png Sure, I can find the manual somewhere, but its a PITA. Today's DRM in the future will not be this easy to overcome.

Oh there are a lot of those, there's a whole tumblr http://pleaseregisterthisshareware.tumblr.com/ You could probably brute-force that one, just click refresh to reboot until you get it :)

Re: The Animatrix

#40

Post by wcarss »

znpy wrote: post #38
david_p wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the other hand, the sites still renders perfectly 14 years later. It would be interesting to see how today's super-fancy-html5 javascript-everywhere no-tables Websites look in 14 years with a modern browser. All the "terrible" techniques you mention actually do the job in a surprisingly time-robust way. Engineering versus hype.

THIS. THIS. THIS. THIS. A MILLION TIMES THIS. The source code is awful and crappy, but 14 years later it still renders. Also if you save the page and load in the browser it will still load correctly.

this might also be an artifact of the development of browsers -- IE was a dominant force until relatively recent times, and browsers had to standardize what existed, then build carefully on top.

It may be the case that the techniques used were particularly robust, but it may also be the case that we've striven to keep them unbroken.

Post reply on HN