38 ms·

<grumble>HN has given N O D E love for the design aesthetic of the presentation and video format recently, but it feels like I'm being fed the details via Morse

<grumble>HN has given N O D E love for the design aesthetic of the presentation and video format recently, but it feels like I'm being fed the details via Morse code. It's infuriating! There is no summary, no overview, no block diagram, just a wall of transcribed prose and gamble on a non-indexed, un-subtitled 8 minute video. I imagine many people (myself included!) will just go "Okay, there a black brick and screen thing with an RPi zero (or is it a different model?) in it ... or something" and move on. Perhaps this is intentional in the same way the OpenBSD homepage is purposefully ugly, to scare off people and create a small effort-moat.</grumble>

imtringued 6y ago
Well, patience is key. Just read the transcript and you'll notice that the project is not finished.
- jstanley 6y ago
  I think it would be fine if the transcript had photographs, but as it is, the transcript is not really sufficient on its own, so you're forced to watch the video anyway.
- test1235 6y ago
  or just go check out the comments on HN and see what everyone else says
sgt 6y ago
The OpenBSD web page is 126kB (less after gzip). Once the image resources are cached, it's only a measly 4kB for the HTML and 4kB for the CSS. I'd say that more than makes up for the page being ugly.
- verytrivial 6y ago
  Looking like it was made by software engineers who don't care about--and perhaps even distain--emphasis on visual design is part of the brand! I mean if you gave a front-end whippersnapper a 126kB budget clearly something with some design harmony could be made that wouldn't, as I say, scare people off. It sets the tone and in a rather quaint way says "This might not be what you are looking for." I like it.
efficax 6y ago
OpenBSD webpage looked just fine in 1998, and it simply hasn't changed since (why should it?)
- lisper 6y ago
  Because some of the things that have changed in web page design since 1998 represent actual progress with respect to UI and UX.
  - freeone3000 6y ago
    They're using modern markup, such as header, nav, and footer, to better represent screen readers. There's more use of color as a secondary identifier, while keeping position and size as primary identifiers. That's lots of improvements!
Fnoord 6y ago
I don't find the OpenBSD page ugly at all. I find it efficient (and I'm currently not an OpenBSD user or developer). If you would like to see ugly pages, there's probably a Geocities mirror up somewhere which one can browse through for an ample amount of examples. A more accurate, descriptive word is, I believe, pre Web 2.0 (or Web 1.0?).
- verytrivial 6y ago
  The LibreSSL pages, which are clearly familial, for a long time included "This page scientifically designed to annoy web hipsters". That the design speaks to you says they've got the tone just about right. :-)
  - Panino 6y ago
    That quote refers to the intentional use of Comic Sans, not the overall site design. The OpenBSD project is semi-famous for intentionally using Comic Sans to repel people who seem to be more interested in fonts than in writing code.
    - verytrivial 6y ago
      We seem to be angrily agreeing.
Accacin 6y ago
I understand in some respects, but for me I just read the headline and go "Oh, that's interesting!" and then read it or watch the video. If I do not like the headline then I do not read the article. I do agree that subtitles should be included though, basic accessibility in my eyes.
jhomedall 6y ago
The first two paragraphs seem to summarize the project fairly well. The text itself also appears to be fairly well organized. I haven't watched the video itself (I'm browsing this between compiles and integration test runs), but I certainly can't find any fault with the textual side of things.
- jszymborski 6y ago
  The page is ostensibly a transcript of the video.
blablabla123 6y ago
I think the major difference is that with OpenBSD it's quite clear what it is, an OS so secure that it sacrifices comfort. That's not an option for most people using a Client and probably neither on the Server because those are usually deployed at work places where standardization is usually more important than sophistication. But I agree, it's not clear what NODE is for, although I get the impression it's a remake of 90s credit card sized "PDAs" (not sure if they ever had a real name).
Panino 6y ago
> purposefully ugly I've been using OpenBSD for about 20 years so I feel like I can talk about this issue. If you browse web.archive.org for old copies of the www.openbsd.org site, you'll notice that the current design is from many years ago, back when lots of websites looked like that. It appears that the current design is from around the year 2000: https://web.archive.org/web/20010118233800/http://www.openbsd.org/ https://web.archive.org/web/20010118233800/http://www.openbs... And that one of the oldest archived versions of the page, from 1997, already had much of the same information and organization, just with less color: https://web.archive.org/web/19970327004719/http://www.openbsd.org/ https://web.archive.org/web/19970327004719/http://www.openbs... Over the years there have been attempts by users to redesign the site. Each had their own problems. I think that for a site redesign to be accepted, it would need to be a major improvement both technically and aesthetically, and for maintenance of the new site to be real easy. OpenBSD devs don't want a bunch of churny work hoisted on them. Just as an aside, I've noticed in this thread that you're making low-effort, kind of rude posts about an important project that's not even related to the actual subject, which is Raspberry Pi. Why are you doing that?
- cxr 6y ago
  > I've been using OpenBSD for about 20 years so I feel like I can talk about this issue. [...] you'll notice that the current design is from many years ago, back when lots of websites looked like that If you view the source for www.openbsd.org, it reveals that it's not a matter of the site being a holdover from the time it was made, as so many replies are saying. It uses modern markup, such as header, nav, article, and footer. OP was referring to a conscious philosophy that has been espoused by OpenBSD folks. See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9240906 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9240906
- verytrivial 6y ago
  > I've noticed in this thread that you're making low-effort, kind of rude posts about an important project I'm sorry if it came across like that. I didn't put this comment there to upset you or anyone, but this happens. I was referring to what appeared to be a design choices in how some projects present themselves to the world, not as a judgement around how important they are. I watched the whole video (with some skipping) for this post. My point was many people might not given the design choices made in how it was presented. I guess "important" projects don't even need to be popular or accessible to do what they need or want to do, and I was simply musing. e.g. You have an explanation for why OpenBSD presents itself they way it does because you are convinced of its value, so you see something different when you look at the homepage vs how ... nearly all? ... other people might see it. My point was is looks like it was designed by engineers with more important matters to think about, but that's some encoding not available to everyone. (And maybe that's okay, hence a small moat around the project.)

imtringued 6y ago

Well, patience is key. Just read the transcript and you'll notice that the project is not finished.

jstanley 6y ago
I think it would be fine if the transcript had photographs, but as it is, the transcript is not really sufficient on its own, so you're forced to watch the video anyway.
test1235 6y ago
or just go check out the comments on HN and see what everyone else says

sgt 6y ago

The OpenBSD web page is 126kB (less after gzip). Once the image resources are cached, it's only a measly 4kB for the HTML and 4kB for the CSS. I'd say that more than makes up for the page being ugly.

verytrivial 6y ago
Looking like it was made by software engineers who don't care about--and perhaps even distain--emphasis on visual design is part of the brand! I mean if you gave a front-end whippersnapper a 126kB budget clearly something with some design harmony could be made that wouldn't, as I say, scare people off. It sets the tone and in a rather quaint way says "This might not be what you are looking for." I like it.

efficax 6y ago

OpenBSD webpage looked just fine in 1998, and it simply hasn't changed since (why should it?)

lisper 6y ago
Because some of the things that have changed in web page design since 1998 represent actual progress with respect to UI and UX.
- freeone3000 6y ago
  They're using modern markup, such as header, nav, and footer, to better represent screen readers. There's more use of color as a secondary identifier, while keeping position and size as primary identifiers. That's lots of improvements!

Fnoord 6y ago

I don't find the OpenBSD page ugly at all. I find it efficient (and I'm currently not an OpenBSD user or developer). If you would like to see ugly pages, there's probably a Geocities mirror up somewhere which one can browse through for an ample amount of examples. A more accurate, descriptive word is, I believe, pre Web 2.0 (or Web 1.0?).

verytrivial 6y ago
The LibreSSL pages, which are clearly familial, for a long time included "This page scientifically designed to annoy web hipsters". That the design speaks to you says they've got the tone just about right. :-)
- Panino 6y ago
  That quote refers to the intentional use of Comic Sans, not the overall site design. The OpenBSD project is semi-famous for intentionally using Comic Sans to repel people who seem to be more interested in fonts than in writing code.
  - verytrivial 6y ago
    We seem to be angrily agreeing.

Accacin 6y ago

I understand in some respects, but for me I just read the headline and go "Oh, that's interesting!" and then read it or watch the video. If I do not like the headline then I do not read the article. I do agree that subtitles should be included though, basic accessibility in my eyes.

jhomedall 6y ago

The first two paragraphs seem to summarize the project fairly well. The text itself also appears to be fairly well organized. I haven't watched the video itself (I'm browsing this between compiles and integration test runs), but I certainly can't find any fault with the textual side of things.

jszymborski 6y ago
The page is ostensibly a transcript of the video.

blablabla123 6y ago

I think the major difference is that with OpenBSD it's quite clear what it is, an OS so secure that it sacrifices comfort. That's not an option for most people using a Client and probably neither on the Server because those are usually deployed at work places where standardization is usually more important than sophistication. But I agree, it's not clear what NODE is for, although I get the impression it's a remake of 90s credit card sized "PDAs" (not sure if they ever had a real name).

Panino 6y ago

> purposefully ugly I've been using OpenBSD for about 20 years so I feel like I can talk about this issue. If you browse web.archive.org for old copies of the www.openbsd.org site, you'll notice that the current design is from many years ago, back when lots of websites looked like that. It appears that the current design is from around the year 2000: https://web.archive.org/web/20010118233800/http://www.openbsd.org/ https://web.archive.org/web/20010118233800/http://www.openbs... And that one of the oldest archived versions of the page, from 1997, already had much of the same information and organization, just with less color: https://web.archive.org/web/19970327004719/http://www.openbsd.org/ https://web.archive.org/web/19970327004719/http://www.openbs... Over the years there have been attempts by users to redesign the site. Each had their own problems. I think that for a site redesign to be accepted, it would need to be a major improvement both technically and aesthetically, and for maintenance of the new site to be real easy. OpenBSD devs don't want a bunch of churny work hoisted on them. Just as an aside, I've noticed in this thread that you're making low-effort, kind of rude posts about an important project that's not even related to the actual subject, which is Raspberry Pi. Why are you doing that?

cxr 6y ago
> I've been using OpenBSD for about 20 years so I feel like I can talk about this issue. [...] you'll notice that the current design is from many years ago, back when lots of websites looked like that If you view the source for www.openbsd.org, it reveals that it's not a matter of the site being a holdover from the time it was made, as so many replies are saying. It uses modern markup, such as header, nav, article, and footer. OP was referring to a conscious philosophy that has been espoused by OpenBSD folks. See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9240906 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9240906
verytrivial 6y ago
> I've noticed in this thread that you're making low-effort, kind of rude posts about an important project I'm sorry if it came across like that. I didn't put this comment there to upset you or anyone, but this happens. I was referring to what appeared to be a design choices in how some projects present themselves to the world, not as a judgement around how important they are. I watched the whole video (with some skipping) for this post. My point was many people might not given the design choices made in how it was presented. I guess "important" projects don't even need to be popular or accessible to do what they need or want to do, and I was simply musing. e.g. You have an explanation for why OpenBSD presents itself they way it does because you are convinced of its value, so you see something different when you look at the homepage vs how ... nearly all? ... other people might see it. My point was is looks like it was designed by engineers with more important matters to think about, but that's some encoding not available to everyone. (And maybe that's okay, hence a small moat around the project.)