3 ms·

> 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

by 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.)
- verytrivial 6y ago
  I have realised since writing this that the topic is actually "gatekeeping". It can feel icky advocating for it. OP is a talented and driven creator who owes us exactly nothing in explanation, but if a hypothetical creator would prefer we at least watch the damn video that can be an entirely reasonable cost of entry. I guess my question was whether it was intentional! Sorry if my OpenBSD comparison clanged. That OS is righteous.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

by Panino 6y ago

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.)

verytrivial 6y ago
I have realised since writing this that the topic is actually "gatekeeping". It can feel icky advocating for it. OP is a talented and driven creator who owes us exactly nothing in explanation, but if a hypothetical creator would prefer we at least watch the damn video that can be an entirely reasonable cost of entry. I guess my question was whether it was intentional! Sorry if my OpenBSD comparison clanged. That OS is righteous.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]