5 ms·
I am the fold (2015)
- joshstrange 3y ago> This Serverless Function has crashed. > Your connection is working correctly. > Vercel is working correctly. Looks like it’s down for now.
- oniony 3y agoOr maybe that's what it's supposed to do.
- colesantiago 3y agoit folded.
- gtirloni 3y agoI feel like looking at that art piece where they put a regular banana in a glass cover and people were admiring it.
- thegabriele 3y agoI was scared to ask (still I am)
- Retr0id 3y agoThis is an unusually aesthetically pleasing error page. I paused for a moment thinking it was some kind of artistic statement, but nope, it's a real error as far as I can tell. Edit: archived error page, for people not seeing it https://archive.is/g6IhW https://archive.is/g6IhW (ironic!)
- orenlindsey 3y agoIt's the default Vercel error page
- Retr0id 3y agoneato
- chadash 3y agoEngineering lead: "Let's use serverless functions. That way we will never have to worry about scalability"
- rubyfan 3y agoNow you have two problems.
- ajanuary 3y agoFor me this occurs when I put my phone on landscape.
- karolist 3y agoFolded under the pressure.
- orenlindsey 3y agoThat's the default Vercel error page
- foxhill 3y agothe (presumably) stateless, serverless function that appears to serve the site has.. crashed? i dunno, i feel like the wording of this error message could be improved :)
- Retr0id 3y agoEven pure functions are allowed to return error values
- burcs 3y agoI feel like viewport height (vh) kind of solved this. Designing for a specific height is janky but now you can just programmatically do it.
- bbx 3y agoExactly. Combining vh with a min and a max height is the best solution nowadays to design an effective landing page.
- idkwhoiam 3y agoFor people not using CSS a lot, vh is a little tricky on mobile. I guess that's what's behind "kind of" in the parent comment. It has to do with the fact that the viewport size changes as you start scrolling down [0] [0] - https://dev.to/frehner/css-vh-dvh-lvh-svh-and-vw-units-27k4 https://dev.to/frehner/css-vh-dvh-lvh-svh-and-vw-units-27k4
- makeitdouble 3y agoI think the more interesting part is which heights are interesting to keep in mind. The below 900 ones are somewhat obvious as they also match smartphone sizes, but I was surprised to see very little common border above that. In particular anything above 2000 seems pretty rare.
- kolinko 3y agoWorth noting that it's points, not pixels. On my 15" Macbook Pro, full screen, it shows 900 as the line, whereas in pixels it's closer to 1800 or sth.
- lycos 3y agoWhen it does load it looks like this could've just be a static site, so it's interesting to see it being a serverless function that crashes the whole time. But yes, the idea of designing for the fold is from early 2000s (or i guess I should say pre-2010 in my experience) and should stay there.
- busterarm 3y ago> But yes, the idea of designing for the fold is from early 2000s (or i guess I should say pre-2010 in my experience) and should stay there. /signed lycos Oh the irony. As much I agree with you, you're talking about the collision of content and eyeballs and advertising. Brands insist on getting their juice.
- tomrod 3y ago[flagged]
- busterarm 3y agoYeah but "everyone else" isn't paying the running costs of all these websites.
- tomrod 3y agoAnd your takeaway is that ad pollution is thus justified? If so, weird take IMO, especially the huge number of examples of bad incentives the ad world encourages. Better: subscription services and building the free web.
- busterarm 3y agoStating the facts isn't an endorsement. It's just the facts.
- wodenokoto 3y agoIt needs a dynamic, server side component, regardless of how you choose to design the site. And if it was to serve a static page, it would also need a client side dynamic component. So I would probably also have gone with full server side rendering.
- hasoleju 3y agoReloading the page worked for me and showed the real content. It is a collection of past visitors viewport heights. When I opened it I saw more than 50 different heights.
- cal85 3y agoCached here: https://web.archive.org/web/20231228133419/https://iamthefold.com/ https://web.archive.org/web/20231228133419/https://iamthefol...
- wodenokoto 3y agoThis is a great idea and really good execution. Apparently the server is not beefy enough for HN front page, but that is easily forgiven in my book.
- LoganDark 3y agoI can't see the popularity of the red line. How will I see the popularity of fullscreen Chromium on Windows 11 now? /j
- tomrod 3y agoDesign for the inverse pyramid. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_pyramid_(journalism) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_pyramid_(journalism...
- lopatin 3y agoI am become HN hug of death
- arnaudsm 3y agoWhat's the median viewport height?
- PUSH_AX 3y agoI remember working for a startup in 2015 when this whole fold thing was still thought to be a big deal. Needless to say I’m glad we trust people know how to scroll now.
- mcmcdtx 3y agoThis illustrates something that has been driving me crazy for years. It seems like more and more sites have modal floating elements at the top and bottom so my 1080 screen is only using a third of the available space for content, I hate to think what the internet must be like for people with 720 ultrabooks now. I've always assumed site designers are all using 4k screens and just can't believe people live without them anymore.
- JaumeGreen 3y agoGoogle Ads is barely usable on my wife's 14' screen. I do have a bigger screen, but she doesn't. So yeah, some people are not conscious at all of other people's limitations.
- moritzwarhier 3y agoSaaS backends often don't consider responsive designs for sane reasons. It's a tradeoff. It's hard to make a web app with many controls and widgets responaive without ruining the experience on bigger screens. Also, 14" notebooks such as the MacBok Pro are notorious in their own right, they have a viewport width of about 1300 CSS "pixels" and about 2560 physical pixels on the horizontal axis (DPR around 2). Many web devs fail to consider DPR in their media queries. Plainly speaking, a 14" MBP has less "CSS pixels" than a cheap 14" laptop with 1920x1080 physical pixels and a DPR of 1.
- 8n4vidtmkvmk 3y agoI want a CSS var for dppx so I can rescale a canvas element to it's native resolution. This is hard to do without JS right now but if you don't, your graphics will be blurry.
- LeifCarrotson 3y agoI just bought a 4k screen for myself, but it's still 16:9 (3840 x 2160). Scaled to the same relative size, it's no better. I also have a 1920x1200 screen at work that I love, it's only 120 pixels taller and I honestly don't notice the difference much when in use, but when I push content over to the laptop screen or unplug, it's a huge loss. I tried to find a 4:3 or 3:2 high-res screen, but even 2560 x 1600 (half as many pixels as my 4k, only 16:10) was more than double the cost of 16:9. I could not find any affordable displays with a non-widescreen aspect ratio. And now I'm part of the problem, having signaled to the panel OEMs that I want 16:9...