3 ms·
> I completely disagree with you. Should we go back to 90s website design just because users didn't ask for modern design practices? So, a bunch of text with
by ajsnigrutin 4y ago
> I completely disagree with you. Should we go back to 90s website design just because users didn't ask for modern design practices?
So, a bunch of text with the content you want/need and a photo?
And we replaced that with multi-megabyte javascripts, autoplaying video ads, floating bars, breaking infinite scroll, breaking ajax, refresh that returns you to another page, not-working "back" buttons, popups asking to signup for a newsletter, to register, to fill out a survey, cookie popups, a bunch of sliders to disable all of them, notificiation request popups, location requests, etc?
Yeah, i like even this:
https://www.spacejam.com/1996/ https://www.spacejam.com/1996/
a lot more than:
https://how-i-experience-web-today.com/ https://how-i-experience-web-today.com/
- tomtheelder 4y agoThere were plenty of terrible, unusable sites in the 90s, and there are tons of great ones now. People look back with crazy rose tinted glasses at these sorts of things.
- ajsnigrutin 4y agocnn.com is ~23 megabytes today. https://twitter.com/elonmusk https://twitter.com/elonmusk is 8.5mb, two bottom bars (accept cookies and login/signin), and after scrolling a page and a half down, i get a popup forcing me to login/signup. Even relatively empty google is 1.8mb This page (HN) is one of the few, that are not bloated, and allow you to read stuff without giving your personal data.