3 ms·
That’s an archived/print-formatted design. It isn’t how the actual website looked in 1999 (CSS and the DOM weren’t advanced enough for those kinds of layouts th
by filmgirlcw 6y ago
That’s an archived/print-formatted design. It isn’t how the actual website looked in 1999 (CSS and the DOM weren’t advanced enough for those kinds of layouts then), unfortunately.
- cmeacham98 6y agoRegardless, I wish I could get this version of the website for current articles.
- ddeck 6y agoIt's an archive page, but that's pretty much what the website looked like in 1999: https://web.archive.org/web/20171230005844/http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/99/01/circuits/articles/28game.html https://web.archive.org/web/20171230005844/http://www.nytime... https://web.archive.org/web/19990209200635/http://www7.nytimes.com:80/ https://web.archive.org/web/19990209200635/http://www7.nytim...
- curveship 6y agoThat's definitely 1999-era HTML and layout, except for the "This is an archived page" header, which is the only CSS on the page. The rest is all well-known tricks from the time: tables, image maps, a few embedded images. Heh, it even has the blockquote trick to pad the margins. Brings back some pretty horrid memories.