Sure, but have you heard the Eurovision Song contest entry about the web: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zc9quuVYZF4
First Website (1992)
71–80 of 96 posts
Re: First Website (1992)
#72Earlier quoted context omitted.
In 1993, you could refresh the home page of Netscape (Mosaic) every day and it would mention new sites that had been added. That became unmanageable quickly, which is when two dudes from Stanford started a directory.
I belive that an early beowser, possibly Mosaic, had an edit button. Think of that and the fundamental change of internet philosophy it implies!
Re: First Website (1992)
#73It’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)
#74Re: First Website (1992)
#75how did we go from this to nextjs?
There's a difference between document-based web sites like this one and web applications. The potential for web applications has mostly emerged as a side effect of the introduction of JavaScript. Back then, JavaScript was supposed to only add minor enhancements to web sites.
Re: First Website (1992)
#76Re: First Website (1992)
#77Earlier quoted context omitted.
In 1993, you could refresh the home page of Netscape (Mosaic) every day and it would mention new sites that had been added. That became unmanageable quickly, which is when two dudes from Stanford started a directory.
I belive that an early beowser, possibly Mosaic, had an edit button. Think of that and the fundamental change of internet philosophy it implies!
Re: First Website (1992)
#78The 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 of the stuff we have been adding since then is GOOD though. 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-corre…
Simple websites don't even care about the UA.
> We now have complex navigation menus that cannot be accessible without JavaScript, and we do that very well.
Is there an actual menu which is more than a tree? Because a dir element that gets rendered by the UA into native menu controls would be just so much better.
Re: First Website (1992)
#79https://info.cern.ch/hypertext/WWW/DesignIssues/Overview.htm...
Re: First Website (1992)
#80Earlier quoted context omitted.
In 1993, you could refresh the home page of Netscape (Mosaic) every day and it would mention new sites that had been added. That became unmanageable quickly, which is when two dudes from Stanford started a directory.
I belive that an early beowser, possibly Mosaic, had an edit button. Think of that and the fundamental change of internet philosophy it implies!