4 ms·

Why does the page look like a joke?

arketyp 8y ago
Why do you ask?
NullPrefix 8y ago
A sort of a filter, getting rid of the viewers who are only interested in the currently popular visual gimmicks instead of the actual content.
- tdurden 8y ago
  The animation led to me leaving the site without taking the time to look at the actual content.
  - ics 8y ago
    The animation says "I hate Animations!".
  - snorrah 8y ago
    I guess the filter worked then
    - tdurden 8y ago
      If the filter is to keep out readers annoyed by animations, then yes, I suppose it worked perfectly!
      - na85 8y ago
        Perhaps you'd be more comfortable if it loaded a few megs of JavaScript.
KSteffensen 8y ago
I guess working with x86 at the microarchitecture level requires a certain amount of humour.
yifanl 8y ago
If you were to ignore the man in the plane, all the content is presented very clearly and directly.
- nailer 8y ago
  It really isn't. There's the weird link thing and the random space at the right you can scroll of the page.
compiler-guy 8y ago
To filter out people who would judge a book by its cover. Also, this is an ancient web site, built back before everyone had to have glitzy junk. So it has a little whimsy. Did you notice how fast it loaded?
- JdeBP 8y ago
  I noticed that it used <a> for fragment anchors instead of the id attribute. I changed over most of those on my WWW site some years ago.
  - exikyut 8y ago
    Well, I just learned that the id attribute is what one should use for fragment anchors. All the HTML source code I've read (probably within the last year or so) used <a>. :/ Perhaps the moral here is that "newer" code was so obfuscated (minified; framework-infested) that I wasn't able to read it, so I only ever ended up looking at very dated HTML to fish examples out of. (Figuring out how to phrase something to Google can sometimes be slower and/or harder than simply looking in existing source code where you know you'll find something...) FWIW, I started tinkering with HTML circa 2003 and have slowly (not especially concertedly) studied it over the years, which is my excuse^Hdefense. HTML5/CSS3 aren't especially intimidating to me (thanks to browser compatibility :D) and I could probably photocopy 60-80% of the designs I see here given significant time (this likely describes a lot of people here), but I don't really actively develop for the Web, so little oversights like this happen. Goes and reads how to include a CSS file again
    - mbreese 8y ago
      I'm a bit ashamed to admit that you just taught me that anchor links work with id attributes. I just always used <a name> tags... which I rarely used, but still. I guess my excuse is that I started with HTML around 1996 :) I guess it's a good thing that I don't do much frontend coding anymore!
      - exikyut 8y ago
reitanqild 8y ago
The page isn't to bad. Better than certain other pages I visit that has to fill half the screen with a notice about how they ask for my permission to ignore the GDPR. Would it be better without an animation? Possibly. But given the current state of the web I'd ve fine with a few extra "i hate animations"-animations if they replaced sites that spy on me, only work in Chrome and advertises dating sites I don't need. Edit: good -> not too bad
rayiner 8y ago
Still clearer and easier to navigate than 95% of websites on the Internet today. Also, even with the animation it loads on my iPhone SE without causing Safari to restart, which is more than I can say for many websites.

Why do you ask?

A sort of a filter, getting rid of the viewers who are only interested in the currently popular visual gimmicks instead of the actual content.

tdurden 8y ago
The animation led to me leaving the site without taking the time to look at the actual content.
- ics 8y ago
  The animation says "I hate Animations!".
- snorrah 8y ago
  I guess the filter worked then
  - tdurden 8y ago
    If the filter is to keep out readers annoyed by animations, then yes, I suppose it worked perfectly!
    - na85 8y ago
      Perhaps you'd be more comfortable if it loaded a few megs of JavaScript.

KSteffensen 8y ago

I guess working with x86 at the microarchitecture level requires a certain amount of humour.

yifanl 8y ago

If you were to ignore the man in the plane, all the content is presented very clearly and directly.

nailer 8y ago
It really isn't. There's the weird link thing and the random space at the right you can scroll of the page.

compiler-guy 8y ago

To filter out people who would judge a book by its cover. Also, this is an ancient web site, built back before everyone had to have glitzy junk. So it has a little whimsy. Did you notice how fast it loaded?

JdeBP 8y ago
I noticed that it used <a> for fragment anchors instead of the id attribute. I changed over most of those on my WWW site some years ago.
- exikyut 8y ago
  Well, I just learned that the id attribute is what one should use for fragment anchors. All the HTML source code I've read (probably within the last year or so) used <a>. :/ Perhaps the moral here is that "newer" code was so obfuscated (minified; framework-infested) that I wasn't able to read it, so I only ever ended up looking at very dated HTML to fish examples out of. (Figuring out how to phrase something to Google can sometimes be slower and/or harder than simply looking in existing source code where you know you'll find something...) FWIW, I started tinkering with HTML circa 2003 and have slowly (not especially concertedly) studied it over the years, which is my excuse^Hdefense. HTML5/CSS3 aren't especially intimidating to me (thanks to browser compatibility :D) and I could probably photocopy 60-80% of the designs I see here given significant time (this likely describes a lot of people here), but I don't really actively develop for the Web, so little oversights like this happen. Goes and reads how to include a CSS file again
  - mbreese 8y ago
    I'm a bit ashamed to admit that you just taught me that anchor links work with id attributes. I just always used <a name> tags... which I rarely used, but still. I guess my excuse is that I started with HTML around 1996 :) I guess it's a good thing that I don't do much frontend coding anymore!
    - exikyut 8y ago

reitanqild 8y ago

The page isn't to bad. Better than certain other pages I visit that has to fill half the screen with a notice about how they ask for my permission to ignore the GDPR. Would it be better without an animation? Possibly. But given the current state of the web I'd ve fine with a few extra "i hate animations"-animations if they replaced sites that spy on me, only work in Chrome and advertises dating sites I don't need. Edit: good -> not too bad

rayiner 8y ago

Still clearer and easier to navigate than 95% of websites on the Internet today. Also, even with the animation it loads on my iPhone SE without causing Safari to restart, which is more than I can say for many websites.