7 ms·

I miss seeing really responsive and performant websites. I feel like browsing the web nowadays no matter what I end up downloading huge tracking bundles and run

• frosted-flakes 6y ago
  This website may be performant, but it's also fixed-width, and thus not the other kind of responsive. Almost unusable on my device.
  • paulryanrogers 6y ago
    When I was learning website design in the early oughts we were taught to make them 'liquid' to work on different width screens. So it was possible then, and without MBs of JS and CSS. Though there were fewer tools to do so. Tables became pseudo grid mode. I think I still prefer the simplicity of that era.
  • dwighttk 6y ago
    What device? Works fine on Safari iOS with the double tap to zoom.
    • frosted-flakes 6y ago
      On my phone. The line lengths are too long, so zooming in to get a reasonable font size means scrolling back and forth for each line. And clicking links is a shot in the dark.
      • dwighttk 6y ago
        Huh. The only slight irritation I notice is the scrolling isn’t soft-locked to just up and down so when I scroll it does a bit of horizontal drift.
        • frosted-flakes 6y ago
          You must have good eyes then, or more likely you have a really big phone.
          • gdubs 6y ago
            Safari’s ‘reader view’ comprehends the page quite well though and makes the text very comfortable.
• toomanybeersies 6y ago
  Even with the giant bundles of BS/JS downloaded, modern websites still load faster than they did in the 90s on my 56k modem. The Dr. Quinn website takes 6 seconds to DOMContentLoaded on a 56k connection. The CNN website (my goto for bloated webpages) takes only 1 second on my "high speed" 40 Mb/s connection. As for responsive. A lot old websites were built specifically for 800x600 displays, and look janky or are a tiny square in the corner on larger resolutions.