Live data from Hacker News

18-year-old personal website, built with Frontpage and still updated

fmboschetto.it

341–350 of 487 posts

Re: 18-year-old personal website, built with Frontpage and still updated

#341

These simple sites show us something profound: If you want something to last, don't base it on something that won't last. There are a some technologies that will never allow somebody to build a site and leave it unchanged for 20 or 25 years. Cold Fusion comes to mind. Almost nobody hosts it anymore for one. Can you imagine running the same WordPress version for 25 years? The version of PHP it runs on will be EOL long…

I've been using my Wordpress site for 12 years now. Sure I upgrade versions from time to time, but the original post is still there and works perfectly.

It's had around 8 million page views in that time.

Re: 18-year-old personal website, built with Frontpage and still updated

#342
2251 Mb size! "Qui c'è una applet Java. Mi spiace che il tuo browser non le supporti" = Here's a Java applet, I'm sorry your browser doesn't support it Marquee still gets animated :O "Questa pagina è ottimizzata per un formato 1024 x 768 pixel a 16,8 milioni di colori, carattere medio" = This page is optimized for a 1024x768 pixel format, 16.8 million colors, medium sized font Still apart from the ancient tooling, it's an example of a personal wiki as periodically come on HN, there's a lot of content!

Re: 18-year-old personal website, built with Frontpage and still updated

#343

I recently did a history of my old websites: https://battlepenguin.com/tech/a-history-of-personal-and-pro... Most of the content is still there, but it's been shifted between static pages, Rails, Wordpress and now Jekyll. It's neat to see one of these gems still out there; a picture of the 90s web that's still functional and being used. Too many of these sites are lost; only available in the Internet Archives.

I took a similar journey over the years from static pages to custom static generators to PHP to Drupal to a custom Django-based blog engine to Jekyll/static pages.

It's interesting because I'm sometimes sad I lost the code for some of those old versions. Those old early PHP and custom static generator codebases would be interesting to revisit with today's ideas, even if just to laugh about. (But also because I know there's probably not-great blog content lost to them.) One of the "custom static generators" I recall was actually a really early not-quite-SPA JS app. I remember it ran really slowly in browsers at the time and worse got slower with each new content added, but these days I wonder if it would seem fine on modern JS engines. (I've got a feeling about the only thing I'd need to change would be to swap `document.write(stuff)` for `element.innerHtml = stuff` and it'd perform quite well today.)

Re: 18-year-old personal website, built with Frontpage and still updated

#344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is one reason why the static site generator I use for my personal website uses HTML rather than something like Markdown. I don't think Markdown is going anyway, incidentally, or that it would be hard to process on my own if I needed to. But the HTML I use is simple enough and Markdown only decreases the probability the site will last a long time.

Markdown and/or markdown processors are known to change. Since there's no single Markdown spec, determining just how a page will render, or what will break, is a bit of a crapshoot. And since Markdown treats nonparsable markup as ... plain text, you don't even get errors or other indicators of failure. You've got to view and validate the output manually or by some other means. With formal tag-based markup languages (…

I feel like the difference with Markdown is that it's not meant to be a hidden source format. It's meant to take an existing WYSIWYG styled-text format—the one people use when trying to style text in plaintext e-mail or IM systems—and to give it a secondary rendering semantics corresponding to what people conventionally think their ASCII-art styling "means."

If a Markdown parser breaks down, it's quite correct for it to just spit out the raw source document—because the raw document is already a readable document with clear (cultural/conventional) semantics. All a Markdown parser does is make a Markdown-styled text prettier; it was already a readable final document.

Re: 18-year-old personal website, built with Frontpage and still updated

#345
post #166

These simple sites show us something profound: If you want something to last, don't base it on something that won't last. There are a some technologies that will never allow somebody to build a site and leave it unchanged for 20 or 25 years. Cold Fusion comes to mind. Almost nobody hosts it anymore for one. Can you imagine running the same WordPress version for 25 years? The version of PHP it runs on will be EOL long…

While this website still works fine, the actual HTML that Frontpage generated isn't exactly easy to maintain if Frontpage stops working for whatever reason. The author of this website is basically stuck using whatever version of Frontpage supports the markup of his website. And I bet there have been plenty of people who used who are no longer able to maintain their website because their editor no longer runs on their…

I properly own several versions of Office all the way back to 95 so I can say this as I am covered :)

Years ago I found a "Portable Frontpage" which of course I downloaded and still have somewhere zipped. I know that MS wouldn't like this much, but life is life and Portable Frontpage exists. So as long as there are Windows, Frontpage will work!

Re: 18-year-old personal website, built with Frontpage and still updated

#347

2251 Mb size! "Qui c'è una applet Java. Mi spiace che il tuo browser non le supporti" = Here's a Java applet, I'm sorry your browser doesn't support it Marquee still gets animated :O "Questa pagina è ottimizzata per un formato 1024 x 768 pixel a 16,8 milioni di colori, carattere medio" = This page is optimized for a 1024x768 pixel format, 16.8 million colors, medium sized font Still apart from the ancient tooling, it…

I just wrote to the gentleman pointing him to this discussion :)

Re: 18-year-old personal website, built with Frontpage and still updated

#348

My favorite like this site is http://www.burger.com - this dude has a hilarious array of hobbies and awesome beveled button links.

"Webmaster" - I miss that term..

Ah, the time when you could actually "master" all the web technologies to keep a website up and running...

Re: 18-year-old personal website, built with Frontpage and still updated

#349
post #64

My personal/hobby business web site ( https://www.rlvision.com ) is based on code 22 years ago. It's built with tables, because that's how you did things back then. The age shows. But I haven't found reason to rebuild it yet. Simply put, it works. It may not be mobile friendly, but the goal is to make available my Windows software, so my aim is desktop users.

It's funny to me that one reason why people said to stop using tables was because of file size. Now we have everyone download almost a megabyte (or more) of javascript to render a few kb of html.

I don't recall page size being a reason. I recall TABLE layouts being a lot smaller than most of their alternatives at the time (FRAMESETs in particular come to mind, because we knew HTTP connection overhead was a thing even back then and needing separate files for each individual website "part" felt like a huge bandwidth waste back then).

The big problem was always Accessibility-related semantics. Websites laid out in TABLEs were often quite confusing to screen readers, as TABLE has a lot of supposedly important semantics in how it should be read/engaged with and using a TABLE for layout follows none of them. (What does a table header mean in a layout? Most layouts wouldn't have good headers. How do you describe what a table column is supposed to be for without a column header?) It's a shame that narrative was never clear enough that Accessibility was always the big reason TABLEs were considered a Bad Idea for layout.

(Speaking of downloading a megabyte of data, I recall how long I felt that a 1.44 MB floppy was the best restriction for the size of an entire website. If it was bigger than a floppy you were probably doing something wrong. I stopped counting floppies a long time ago; that person might be ashamed at how many floppies a typical website downloads these days.)

Re: 18-year-old personal website, built with Frontpage and still updated

#350

https://developers.google.com/speed/pagespeed/insights/?url=... 100 Points. Mobile First. Better than React Native.

This is hilarious! Turns out 18 year old websites were mobile friendly after all

In 2002, 1024×768 and 800x600 were mostly used resolutions for computer screens so yes, those were mobile friendly...
Post reply on HN