It’s impressive how quickly the WWW became mainstream, given how few people had internet access back then. Bitcoin is now 16 years old but compared to the WWW in 2008 is hardly used on a daily basis.
First Website (1992)
61–70 of 96 posts
Re: First Website (1992)
#62The sad part is, how infinitely more functional these simple, static HTML documents are, compared to much of the shit that floods the "modern" web. Ofc these pages cannot replace SPAs. That's not the point. The point is: Much of the web isn't SPAs. And much of what is SPAs shouldn't be SPAs. Much of the web is displaying static, or semi-static information. Hell, much of the web is still text. But somehow, the world a…
Some examples:
We now have to accommodate all types of user agents, and we do that very well.
We now have complex navigation menus that cannot be accessible without JavaScript, and we do that very well.
Our image elements can now have lots of attributes that add a bit of weight but improve the experience a lot.
Etc.
Also, things are improving/self-correcting. I saw a listing the other day for senior dev with really good knowledge of the vanilla stuff. The company wants to cut down on the use of their FE framework of choice.
I cannot remember seeing listings like that in 2020 or 2021.
PS.
I did not mean this reply as a counterpoint.
What I meant to say is, even if we leave aside the SPAs that should not be SPAs, we see the problem in simple document pages too. We have been adding lots of stuff there too. Some is good but some is bad.
Re: First Website (1992)
#63Re: First Website (1992)
#64It’s impressive how quickly the WWW became mainstream, given how few people had internet access back then. Bitcoin is now 16 years old but compared to the WWW in 2008 is hardly used on a daily basis.
It's not that WWW was quick, it's that Bitcoin is useless.
Re: First Website (1992)
#65Re: First Website (1992)
#66Re: First Website (1992)
#67how did we go from this to nextjs?