3 ms·
2009-2014? That's not the old web. Or I'm old. Take your pick.
by bradley13 2mo ago
2009-2014? That's not the old web. Or I'm old. Take your pick.
- stillpointlab 2mo agoI've just gotten used to this at this point. My first time on the web was somewhere around 1995 I think, although my first time on the Internet was earlier (it was a proxy through some ancient BBS and I'm pretty sure it was using gopher). Even though I was just a kid back then, clearly that makes me old now.
- kQq9oHeAz6wLLS 2mo agoSpeaking of gopher, I'm low-key hoping that becomes the new place for all the non-bot traffic. Gopher felt magical back in the pre-www days.
- inigyou 2mo agoToo many protocols. https://wiki.archiveteam.org/index.php/SmolNet https://wiki.archiveteam.org/index.php/SmolNet
- nkrisc 2mo agoIt was still a significantly different era than today. Let’s call it Middle Web. Maybe Late Middle Web.
- Gormo 2mo agoYeah, I'd say "old web" is early '90s up through about mid-2000s or so. Geocities, Tripod, Angelfire, lots of standalone web forums, the early blogosphere, no social media, etc.
- clickety_clack 2mo agoPre-social media is probably the watermark. That’s what sucked all the content out of the web and into walled-garden platforms.
- ColdStream 2mo agoAs they say, now it is five social media platforms posting copies of each others content.
- rustcleaner 2mo agoIt's time for trust busters to mandate the gardens have open standards based authentication-less protocols for scraping and viewing the content behind their walls. If that bankrupts them then so what? That's what they get for being web-destroying walled gardens!
- Gormo 2mo agoBack in the early 2000s, we were encouraging all of our friends and family still using AOL to come over to the open web. Little did we know that they'd provide the impetus for the open web to gradually turn into a new version of AOL.
- MarkusQ 2mo agohttps://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/old-2 https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/old-2
- s0rce 2mo agoI think there are a few eras. Pre-graphics, then pre-Google search, then pre-social media/public facebook.
- ColdStream 2mo agoThere was the sub era of Flash based nonsense. Somewhere in the 2002-2005 period.
- ErigmolCt 2mo agoYeah, 2009-2014 feels more like the old social web to me
- drooopy 2mo agoRight? When I think of the old web I think of my Xena and X-Files fan sites on Geocities circa 1997
- darknavi 2mo agoI was a few years late to the start (early 90s kid) but I am nostalgic for the vast amount of myfreewebs + dot.tk websites out there. Hit counters on the front page was mandatory of course.
- ajsnigrutin 2mo ago+1 for this I'd consider the facebook and mega era to be relatively new, the "old web" for me would be the one without centralization around a few giants, the era of random phpbb forums, private websites with "this site is under construction" banners and internet directories to find stuff.
- dd8601fn 2mo agoGod… I stood up so, so many phpBB instances.
- benjaminl 2mo agoFor me the old web is when people still had homepages. When those went away, the old web died.
- mattkevan 2mo agoI’m old and it’s definitely not the old web. I consider the old web to be when PNGs were sliced with Fireworks and laid out in tables. 2009-2014 is Web 2.0, back when people still thought social media was a good idea.
- b3ing 2mo ago2003-2009ish was Web 2.0, part of it was CSS/web standards and AJAX and blogging becoming more mainstream
- pluc 2mo agoHa, people who didn't live it will have a hard time believing AJAX was as strong a buzzword as AI is today. Crazy to think asynchronous requests were peak innovation at the time
- pluc 2mo agoOld web was 88x31 buttons, 468x60 banners and tables
- toast0 2mo ago> I consider the old web to be when PNGs were sliced with Fireworks and laid out in tables. PNGs? We had (mostly static) GIFs and we liked them.
- mattkevan 2mo agoHa yeah you're right. It wasn't a proper homepage if it didn't have an animated traffic cone 'Under construction' gif.
- darkwater 2mo agoPNGs are new, not old.
- mrexroad 2mo ago‘09-‘14 is hilariously not the “old web.” With that said, those of us who participated in what I consider the “old web” are likely “old” now, so… shrug? Two of my favorite sites [0][1] still online—Lurkers Guide to Babylon 5 and ex-astris-scientia—were started in ‘92 and ‘98 respectively. Elegant content for a more civilized age. [0] http://www.midwinter.com/lurk/ http://www.midwinter.com/lurk/ [1] https://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/ https://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/
- timcederman 2mo ago1992 would be super SUPER early for the web. Looks like it launched in 1994.
- mrexroad 2mo agoYeah, I took a shortcut by just grabbing the copyright on page, but Lurker’s Guide to Babylon 5 has a slightly more storied history than being a www site. It started on Usenet before the pilot even aired iirc. I assume the ‘92 date encompasses the early content that evolved into the site it became. With that said, its domain has changed a few times iirc… so maybe not the best example given the nature of the article.
- Xorakios 2mo agoMy first grandchild was born in 2000. And the COBOL panic for Y2K is probably partly my fault because 4 characters were too computational expensive when I wrote code that probably still powers your Igloo ice containers and GEICO insurance policies. 80's tech still persists!
- ErigmolCt 2mo ago2009 is old web now, and this is how we find out we're old... Yet I think maybe "middle-aged web" is the more accurate term