4 ms·
What a breath of fresh air is a 1999-era web page. Fast loading, simple, readable.
by jl6 10y ago
What a breath of fresh air is a 1999-era web page. Fast loading, simple, readable.
- bleachedsleet 10y ago...horrid color schemes, no support for mobile devices...yeah, what a breath of fresh air.
- Chronic9q 10y agoSounds like modern day bootstrap websites.
- Gracana 10y agoThe background is light colored and the foreground is 100% black, and the text is full width and large on my phone. What would mobile support mean, a hamburger menu and no zooming? No thanks.
- yoz-y 10y agoLuckily there's the reader mode. Those fonts are tiny and the background is too dark. But since there aren't any JS tricks this works very well. thumbs up.
- hawkice 10y agoLooks fine on mobile, header picture could be a bit thinner but other than that it's basically perfectly responsive.
- Ezhik 10y agohttp://motherfuckingwebsite.com/ http://motherfuckingwebsite.com/
- jl6 10y agoI read the whole thing on a mobile and had no problem whatsoever.
- crystaln 10y agoYeah, I can't believe they didn't use responsive CSS in 1999. Such ignorance.
- bhaak 10y agoThat's because in 1999, HTML was considered responsive by default. It was up to the browser how to render it given its output medium. AFAIK it was the iPhone's Safari that sucked first at rendering HTML without mobile-customized CSS.
- jshevek 10y agoLooks great for me on mobile. Maybe "supporting mobile" becomes more important when you do things that would otherwise make the mobile experience awful. Keeping it simple seems to support mobile automatically.
- Symbiote 10y agoLooks fine in Chrome, but the text is tiny in Firefox. I think Firefox should handle this better. http://m.imgur.com/pReOW6H,lZhlzFL http://m.imgur.com/pReOW6H,lZhlzFL
- justinpombrio 10y agoI'm curious: what do you mean by "no support for mobile devices"? It loads on my phone and is readable; so you must mean something beyond that?