Makes you wonder who, if anyone, is still paying to host the site. Someone must be keeping it online on purpose, right?
Looks like this is someone's intentional effort to archive these things.
41–50 of 98 posts
Makes you wonder who, if anyone, is still paying to host the site. Someone must be keeping it online on purpose, right?
Looks like this is someone's intentional effort to archive these things.
Ahh, 1996 was an awesome year for websites. Space Jam: http://www2.warnerbros.com/spacejam/
I feel like there had to be at least someone with a very refined sense of aesthetic making awesome websites back then.
I wish sites were still designed this way. Not the animated gifs or the font size 1, but the fact that once the site is loaded, it's completely done. And if I refresh the page, or bookmark the link and come back later, I'm going to see the exact same page. According to the Chrome developer tools the page took 2ms to render and 4ms to paint. I write JavaScript professionally but not all web sites need JavaScript, in f…
"DEBATE MENTION OF WEB SITE CAUSES FLOOD OF VISITORS" Goes on to say that the site received more than 762,000 "hits" in a four hour period: http://www.dolekemp96.org/news/releases/proct0796a.htm edit: hours
Ahh, 1996 was an awesome year for websites. Space Jam: http://www2.warnerbros.com/spacejam/
I've always wondered, what's the best looking website of the 1990s? Was there anything that people would deem as "good" as some of today's top designs? I feel like there had to be at least someone with a very refined sense of aesthetic making awesome websites back then.
Essentially, no. There was no one with a very refined aesthetic making websites at the time. Even the Louvre's website (one of the first art museum websites I remember popping up) was extremely ugly.
I was going to ask: " so how is it that the average non-commercial site can be expected to crash upon reaching ten HN upvotes but this 1996 is still chugging along strong " After all, this was well before such thing as CDNs were in wide use. Then I looked at the source and saw that it's a Frontpage site. * This brings back memories of when you could get at least $50/hr to make something like this.
I wish sites were still designed this way. Not the animated gifs or the font size 1, but the fact that once the site is loaded, it's completely done. And if I refresh the page, or bookmark the link and come back later, I'm going to see the exact same page. According to the Chrome developer tools the page took 2ms to render and 4ms to paint. I write JavaScript professionally but not all web sites need JavaScript, in f…
The biggest problem with readability for me lately is awful Google Fonts which never render right.
There is a link at the bottom of the page to: http://www.4president.org/ This site has archives of campaign websites, website features, and campaign ads. I think it's fascinating to see the paradigm shifts in web design indicated by these four-year gaps. And campaigns being a temporary thing, I think they perfectly encapsulate the design of the "era". I was going through the years and was thinking "sure, a lot change…
Ahh, 1996 was an awesome year for websites. Space Jam: http://www2.warnerbros.com/spacejam/
I've always wondered, what's the best looking website of the 1990s? Was there anything that people would deem as "good" as some of today's top designs? I feel like there had to be at least someone with a very refined sense of aesthetic making awesome websites back then.
I wish sites were still designed this way. Not the animated gifs or the font size 1, but the fact that once the site is loaded, it's completely done. And if I refresh the page, or bookmark the link and come back later, I'm going to see the exact same page. According to the Chrome developer tools the page took 2ms to render and 4ms to paint. I write JavaScript professionally but not all web sites need JavaScript, in f…
Thought: should we aim to vary contrast by device?
On my mobile phone I prefer sites with higher contrast, especially when out and about, on my retina iPad however, sites with white backgrounds and lots of text are much more tiring/difficult to process (plus bright screens, incl. tablets and phones are shown to result in insomnia [1]).
At the risk of going completely O/T here, f.lux [2] has helped me a lot in this respect.
[1] http://gizmodo.com/5524005/experts-kindle-helps-you-sleep-ip...