4 ms·

I still test and validate my websites with Netscape 2.x and up. Any Browser can be a reality.

colechristensen 4y ago
If I had my billion dollars I would fund a modern intentionally crippled hypertext browser with hard limits on programmability and style complexity.
- Thiez 4y ago
  A shame that you would waste your money on a browser that nobody would use.
  - alcover 4y ago
    I would. I already use FF mainly under a locked-down profile for mere reading. (I use another profile for madatory interactive sites like banking and stuff). Others like me would. And resource-constrained devices. An eco-system of low-tech sites could emerge with a label signaling them as simple and virtuous.
    - Thiez 4y ago
      So you basically want gemini? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gemini_(protocol) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gemini_(protocol)
      - alcover 4y ago
        Interesting. But I meant only using a subset of current web stack, and insist on low resource.
      - forgotmypw17 4y ago
        The issue I have with Gemini is that it discards 25+ years of established domain knowledge and existing software for something which does not provide any additional functionality over what today's software already offers.
- Karunamon 4y ago
  It sounds like you are describing Gemini. https://gemini.circumlunar.space/ https://gemini.circumlunar.space/
  - account42 4y ago
    Gemini is on the other extreme (except for requiring the crypto complexity that comes with TLS). I would prefer something that still lets people express themselves creatively like the early web did. Personally, I think even newer CSS is fine even if more complex than it could be if re-designed - the problem is mostly JS and million different APIs that come with that as well as the expectation that that the browser will be able to execute that JS insanely fast.
- pdntspa 4y ago
  Why not just bring back the 486?
- forgotmypw17 4y ago
  Some browsers you may want to try, which support only HTML and CSS: Dillo Links NetSurf

If I had my billion dollars I would fund a modern intentionally crippled hypertext browser with hard limits on programmability and style complexity.

Thiez 4y ago
A shame that you would waste your money on a browser that nobody would use.
- alcover 4y ago
  I would. I already use FF mainly under a locked-down profile for mere reading. (I use another profile for madatory interactive sites like banking and stuff). Others like me would. And resource-constrained devices. An eco-system of low-tech sites could emerge with a label signaling them as simple and virtuous.
  - Thiez 4y ago
    So you basically want gemini? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gemini_(protocol) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gemini_(protocol)
    - alcover 4y ago
      Interesting. But I meant only using a subset of current web stack, and insist on low resource.
    - forgotmypw17 4y ago
      The issue I have with Gemini is that it discards 25+ years of established domain knowledge and existing software for something which does not provide any additional functionality over what today's software already offers.
Karunamon 4y ago
It sounds like you are describing Gemini. https://gemini.circumlunar.space/ https://gemini.circumlunar.space/
- account42 4y ago
  Gemini is on the other extreme (except for requiring the crypto complexity that comes with TLS). I would prefer something that still lets people express themselves creatively like the early web did. Personally, I think even newer CSS is fine even if more complex than it could be if re-designed - the problem is mostly JS and million different APIs that come with that as well as the expectation that that the browser will be able to execute that JS insanely fast.
pdntspa 4y ago
Why not just bring back the 486?
forgotmypw17 4y ago
Some browsers you may want to try, which support only HTML and CSS: Dillo Links NetSurf