Early 2000s webdesign
This was from the late-2000s but I think it counts
>>445832Yeah, that counts. Lots of color and use of various shapes for links.
>>445831I want to know what this aesthetic is called. I saw a lot of these early 2000s websites, my brother had one.
>>445831From someone from that time who hated it at that time: no
>>445844No what? i didnt ask a question retard.
>>445845I'm saying this shit sucks, dumbass. literal fucking zoomer autism
>>445846im 35 faggot. i was there at that time as well idiot if you dont like it, bye.
>>445831
>>445878>affiliate linksMiss those, more human system at finding related content instead of relying on algorithms and hashtags.
>>445839its callled pretend youre a SONY walkman
>>445878hoverdesk looks p coolsad all those desktop alternatives bit the dust
>>445831Http://www.lyricus.org
>>445926>Http://www.lyricus.orgwhat the fuck is this lol, trying to find shit on this and can only find this: https://www.amazon.com/WingMakers-Anthology-Teaching-Invitation-Japanese-ebook/dp/B00CC9HQRC/ref=sr_1_1?qid=1687831935&refinements=p_27%3ALyricus+Teaching+Order&s=digital-text&sr=1-1&text=Lyricus+Teaching+Order
>>445988more. what in the everfuck is this lolhttps://soundcloud.com/wingmakers-comthis is like that aesthetic in sound form
Anyone have any remember Spoono?
>>446210I do, I was dabbling in web design back then and they had some great content... and one of the better executed pixel art style websites.
>>446210Which also reminded me of GUIstuff.com. You could hardly count all the websites that ripped off their design back then.
>>445831This nigga is alright. You can definitely feel the age of the design though. https://www.worldsaway.com.au/daysofasha.php
>>446215Glad you have a screenshot of it. I always remembered a blue version of their layout. I also recall a website that was orange called Axangec (I think), I was only 12 but the guy still made me a mod of his forum lol.
>>446302Spoono had a nifty style sheet switcher where you could choose like eight different color schemes, I replicated it on my own website at the time. I had an account on their forums too, but I spent a lot more time on Tutorialforums.com.
>>445831I remember one or 2 years ago I stumbled upon a couple of twitter accounts that were still making/sharing these kinds of designs. Can't find them anymore, if anyone has an idea, I'll take it
neocities.orgLots of new websites being made in classic late 90s early 2000s fashion.Cool and all, but the content on those sites are sorely lacking.
>>446458Seems like a bunch of gay shit
>>446488yeah, a bunch of gays found there way there, i had to dig for anything remotely reminding me of the dbz sites of yore, but its mostly lain shit and stuff from tumblr users. I dont know what happened to the guys that used to make websites back then.
>>445839Y2K
>>445831http://cm.thran.uk/archive/betahotel/index.htmlIt's a bit cringe but this is something I had in 2007 and revived in 2011, it almost fits the aesthetic. It was for a habbo hotel retro.
>>446865Not at all: this is kinda nice!
http://www.kobash.com/tetris/
>>446893fun & games & fun & games &
http://ivibes.org/
>>445839We called it tech back then
>>447009nooo don't bring your millennial 'i actually remember this and made similar things', it's akchually bunkochonko9ddesign, a subcategory of chungobongobillcosbynightrider
bump for curiousity
Why don't they look like this anymore? This is so nice!
>>447978Not "edgy" enough, apparently.
>>447998What does that mean? Is today's design "edgy"?
>>447999I used it as a buzzword, but by that I mean becoming more and more grotesque with each day for some sort of shock "humour" nonsense.
>>448021I still don't get it. Where is there shock humour in modern graphic design?
>>448021what the fuck are you babbling about you fucking retard
>>448026Scroll up to picrel, fool.
>>446458This is amazing. it seems like it's kind of turning into myspace.
>>446458try the Gemini protocol
>>447021Unhinged
>>445839>I want to know what this aesthetic is called.early 200s web design
>>445839Deviant Art looked like this early on.
https://www.d2jsp.org/
This was cool web design. Now all have the same style and there is zero info when you land on a page. Waste of space having a big ass picture covering the full screen.
>>447998>>448021>>448126I wonder who could be behind these posts
http://cafelog.com/A sample B2 blog straight out of the early 2000s
>>449162shit like op's image contains like 3 paragraphs of text totalif you go one of those archives with the 'cool' early 2000s flash/background image websites, that's mostly the theme - bunch of images distract from that it serves only couple of txt paragraphs in 9px font for display on 1024x800 with 7 ie toolbars, including the '01 09 11 launched the site, still under construction'you will be reminded that a lot was novelty and visual noise to distract from the lack of substance and today's designs (outside of product landing pages that nobody but search bots read) are more objective and to the point and merit, making it absolutely obvious when there isn't any - a paragraph of text is a paragraph of text and nothing more
Kinda ironic that webdesigners did this kind of stuff without css3, which - when it first arrived sround 2010 - was supposed to *improve* and expand capabilities and tomake it even easier, to have a unique look. But now everything just looks the same about everywhere
Will these ever make a comeback?
>>450447everything has a beginning and an end. Because these had their run they hold their value. If you keep making them in perpetuity, eventually it will lose all of its appeal.
>>445831we had perfection and abandoned it, and for what?
>>450478because nothing lasts forever, bitch nigga faggot
>>445831>>445839Im going to redesign my website to look like this, but i dont know how it will clash with my content that I make.
>>450595redesign my balls on your mom's face too, bitch
>>450606considering the absolute extend of your creativity I tend to doubt any mom has seen your balls ever.
>>449067i member.I think these websites developed partly because earlier website like on geocities or angelfire, were poorly laid out ,and a mess with jpegs floating in thr void. So this style was an attempt to organize things
>>445831>pre blog webthey took our weebs>>445844>niggers hate creativitytell me something new
God this thread is so fucking nostalgic, 12 years old using some of the first CMS's to host a tiny website for myself on my Sony Vaio before I even knew what port forwarding was.
>>450654>hosts a page>port stay closedkek, nice.>>450634>this style was an attempt to organize thingsAnd it fucking worked. Especially compared to google basically dicatating the usage of MARGIN and PADDING and WHITESPACE and even CAPS in BUTTONS in their shitty design these days.Web designers/devs bitched about everything being unmaintainble, because you had to have custom pictures for every part of the page. Then CSS got better and instead of using that, we went on to design everything in some kind of fucked up minimalism. You cannot make this shit up.
Peak early internet
>>450760>vrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
>>450760Damn, Joe Cartoon, not thought about that in a long fuckin time. Thanks anon.
>>450607doesn't take creativity to dunk on your mom with my balls
>>450806indeed not to dunk. but to get in the situation of dunking
>>451081>Red Rocket
Why did we obsess with making everything Arial, 11 px big? Just monkey see, monkey do, huh
>>451497As one anon said, it was to organize what was already a disorganized website layout.I'd also say that they look like an extension of windows 98. The bevel emboss stuff didn't start until XP and Flash hit. There were a mix of the two during this era because not everyone jumped to XP right away.Look at the browser window and see how its the same as the website layout
Old deviantart
This is insane.
>>451545DeviantArt peaked years ago, I'm not sure when, but the latest iteration is bad.I vaguely remember that you posted but the green one that came later seemed better.
>>446233possibly the realest motherfucker in this thread
Here are some ccTLD registry websites that haven't been updated in a long whilehttps://pastebin.com/iz574u66some of them are from the 90s some 00s
>>445839Early skeumorphism.Links designed to look like physical buttons, image areas made to look like screens or windows surrounded by matte textures where text is placed to resemble real world signs/posters, etc.
>>445832R.I.P. UNIQUE web
>>446458I fucking love neocities
Back in 1999-2000, all internet connections were dial-up. Modem's max download speed was 56k, around 30k-to40k was the norm.When we built websites, the home page had to download in 10 seconds or less. The different colors used in the background, divs,etc were either coded or an image consisting of a single pixel with the color you wanted was repeated . for backgrounds with alternating lines of diferrent colors, an image of a column te width of a single pixel was repeated.Images were compressed to the exact size in pixels the you needed it at 72dpi. All images were preloaded. common monitor resolutions were 640x480 and 800x600 so you had to code your HTML and JavaScript accordingly.Nowadays, most web developers don't know shit., only use CMS based websites(wordpress, joomla,drupal,etc)If something goes wrong, they can't code, can't fix, can't modify, etc.Can't make a CMS from scratch with a text editor like notepad.
>>449114>https://www.d2jsp.org/
>>452272>Can't make a CMS from scratch with a text editor like notepad.Actually you can, but very few people in this world would be insane enough to do that...
>>445831>>445839this makes me want to install winampgood times>>446316I'd take a 1 month probation period over a discord server any day
>>452272Mobile killed it.
My father-in-law is a webmaster. It is difficult to get his attention when looking at a magnificent UI because he is lost in wonder. We were in a looking at a website together years ago and I asked him what it would cost to build it today. I will never forget his answer… 'We can’t, we don’t know how to do it'.
>>453321>digital blasphemyHoly sovl
>>452272know any tuts on making old websites like >>445839
good ol days
If anyone knows how to make their sites like that please tell me mine looks like absolute dogshit
>>451545If only I had an email back then
beholdthe owner moved to ugly social media, tumblr etc. but the site remains in all its gloryhttps://historyofhyrule.com/
Kind of an /wsr/, but does anyone remember which gaming news website in the 2000s used a white/faux-translucent plastic theme and used pixel art icons for the game platforms (GC, PS2, XBOX, GBA etc). I looked on archive.org and it doesn't seem to have been GameSpy, IGN or GameSpot. Anyone know what I'm talking about, or remember other game news portals from that era?
i really miss all of the old communities that were around in early 2000s here in sweden. this is a legendary swedish hiphop site that had very active forums. lots of rappers got their start here uploading mixtapes, cyphers, rap battles and stuff. also had a good market place. what sucks is that only the log-in screens of these communities are available in the archives and i can't find any screenshots of what the sites looked like inside anymore.
You're using it.
Why dont we start making websites like these on our own, lamenting aint gonna bring these web designs back, we have to spit in the eyes of corporate minimalism and the Phooners
>>454240honestly imagine the outrage that would come if they changed the look of the site even slightly. good thing 4chan doesn't make enough money to pay ux designers.>>454243it's less about the inability to make them and more that no matter what you try a good majority of people online browse with their phones, so a good majority of sites will have to look boring and mobile-oriented.you can try making one if you don't care about broad appeal, but even among hobbyist communities you usually don't want to chase people away just for ~aesthetics~
>>454243>>454244It's not like these type of websites are completely gone. They're just no longer popular that's all.https://peelopaalu.neocities.org/
>>454244Thats understandable, but there are scripts where it toggles between desktop and mobile layouts. So to think of a way these 'old' designs would work on mobile would be a fun project.Well, I"m going to look into it myself. My brother use to make sites like these:http://www.futureexpress.net/fe9_news.htmbut I never picked his brain to know how to do it. believe most of it was css and the use of pixels.
>>454204This site is a work of art.
>>445831We need a search bar to browse information now. So, if we want to see the coffee page. You can type in bean and you'll find coffee and tea. You can refine it. These simple parsing systems are hyper archaic binary.
>>454243Just do it Anon, there is definitely a niche group of people who are still interested in this sort of stuff and the space could use more normal interesting people and less politically obsessed deranged motherfuckers.My advice if you want to get started is to create something you're personally passionate about, don't aim for high traffic, and try to avoid making a personal website unless you like just writing into the void (the "my blog" kinda sites) as they very quickly burn people out and inevitably end up abandoned when people realise that they could have just posted it on Twitter with less effort and gotten more engagement.If you have a hobby, collection, niche set of skills, or special autistic interest, make a site where you can talk all about it in all of the depth you want to, and you'll quickly find yourself engaged in creating something people actually give a shit about.>>454247>peelopaaluI had no idea people still gave a shit about my website, I usually hang out on /g/, but stumbled across this thread when Googling to see why I got a spike in traffic yesterday. I have a shit load of dead links to get through and I've honestly just lost a lot of motivation to keep going with the project, so I've kinda had to put it on the back burner for now. I'll get back to it sooner or later.
>>454243nobody cares, the internet is deadAI will accelerate us into sludge oblivion
>>454276Everytime I see a doom post I think of a deranged man shitting his pants in public, or some tranny saying nothing matters to justify their gentital mutilation and spitting in the face of God.
>>446316>but I spent a lot more time on Tutorialforums.comonly retards went there. it was full of carebears
>>446458No, neocities is crap because it's the equivalent of adding a greenscreen vhs overlay to a 1080p 12000fps iphone video. Kids who've gotten all their ideas about web design from pinterest and not from a book.
>>446216This is actually nice and cool.
>>451546what is the first step to designing a site like this?
>>454423Start with a transparent png for the overall layout with the transparency being the parts where the links nestle between. Then use this:https://www.w3docs.com/snippets/css/how-to-position-one-image-on-top-of-another-in-html-css.html
>>454450Wait what the fuck? That's so much more simple than i thought it'd be.Do you know any good books on 2000s website design?
>>454451Don't know any books but most of 2000s web was built on simple basic javascript, html and css which can be learned on w3. You're essentially getting creative with limitations, fucking around with divs and tables.
>>454451>>454452I wanted to share one other trick though if you're new and just getting started, something you can play with.that image >>451546I haven't been to the website to check, but my guess on those red buttons is that they change based on clicks and mouseover. You could change the color or image of them by using thesehttps://www.w3schools.com/howto/howto_css_image_overlay.asphttps://www.w3schools.com/CSSref/sel_hover.phpUsing a mouseover or onmouse click to dynamically change elements of a webpage.
>>454453Ah yeah, I'm familiar with some basic CSS functions but that's helpful, thanks.And I couldn't find the right webpage from archive.org, but I did find this cool page. A bit broken even with Ruffle but I can still feel the sovl.https://web.archive.org/web/20060528211354/http://www.conspiracygames.com/
>>454466Those sounds. I love those lo fidelity sound effects they used to use in stuff like that and flash.
>>454274what are some sites that have this small pixel aesthetic? i love it
>>454519https://www.nitrome.com/i genuinely don't think they've changed their layout since i found them over a decade ago. unfortunately the site is one of many that took a hit due to flash's end
>>454521Thats rad, wish I knew about that site sooner.
>>446215Wooow, core memory unlocked. Fond memories of doing my own mildly successful E/N website, hoping to affiliate with Spoono one day.
>>451085nintendo knew how to do graphic design but then got fucking amnesia post-2017
>>445831I miss centerfleet.
>>4546184Chan.net btw
>>454618>>454619wait what the fuck? how is the domain both not squatted and also not bought?also who would even be taking screenshots of 4chan in 2003? that's the kind of thing i'd expect someone to only have kept track of if they recorded their screen for a portion of the day like in this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HNmzXqcNeaA
>>454620Found the screen on the web but remember taking also screens in 2005, and accedently hitting >>>/d/ instead of h in the fucking html frame
>>454466How does one even make a site like that? I've started programming a while ago but I'm nowhere near knowledgeable on things, the positioning, the image, the curves and all.It all looks so fun and elegant and also impossible to make.
does anyone have any style guides for making these? some forums would have a ton that were all completely different in tone from other forums but they all looked like they were made by one guy. is it just because they're so simple or what?
I made my own website this year to reflect y2k design. It was very fun to make, and I was able to avoid tables but I could add them in if I make a new layout theme. I also stumbled upon people with their own y2k sites and a revival of old internet. I'm not gonna advertise here but just know there are people still making this stuff and if enough people do it then we can restore the good ibternet and abandon the bot corporate mega sites and bullshit modern web. I also lost my old layouts from back in the day but they were colorful and glorious
>>454698what's your site anon?
http://www.citycreator.com/
>>446458Just started a page and damn i forgot how to html
>>454888Feel free to share when you got something going.
>>454903thanks maybe i will if it looks good and this thread is up. I'm fighting every urge to make a shitpost 90s geocities page or something actually tasteful but I'll probably just do both.
>>454274>>454247Tourist from other boards here. I've never been to this board or seen your site, but I checked it out and got sent on one heck of a journey yesterday. Fantastic stuff, thanks for putting it together dude. It's easy to forget what the internet used to be like before everything converged into social media.
>>445893Can we bring back having the login textboxes on the top right corner. That was extremely convenient
https://guidebookgallery.org/
>>454670scratch that, completely forgot that i used to see these all over deviantart so i just checked if they had any tutorials and they have a ton, and from the 2000s/early 2010s to boothttps://www.deviantart.com/daemotes/journal/Creating-Emoticons-222852757https://www.deviantart.com/livius/journal/Making-Emotes-The-Tutorial-Master-List-214148306
>>451546>>454450Back in the day these things were built with strict table layouts with literally no flexibility. Media queries didn't exist yet and websites literally just said "if your shit isn't this big it won't work, get fucked." Nowadays you can get away with a lot of bullshit thanks to relative->absolute positioning and removing pointer events. Still, the reason this stuff went away is because it's an absolute financial nightmare to maintain the more customized it all is.
Anyone got more geocities pages? I've hit a creative roadblock on my site and can't decide how i want it to look.
>>455339have you tried searching through the links/torrents here? https://wiki.archiveteam.org/index.php/GeoCitiesnot sure what you're going for so i can't be more specific.
>>455342Nothing specific just the general vibe of the old so bad it's good pages. I'm working on the index page and have no idea what to put on it besides links to my other pages.
how do i make sites like these? what applications/code do i need to know
>>455381Well I don't know how new you are but it's all pretty simple HTML & CSS that you can learn from w3schools honestly. These are obviously very old and probably not the best to copy wholesale but if you see any sites with an aesthetic you enjoy then you can just inspect element it and pick and choose what you want to modify until you get the hang of it. In terms of applications then anything works but probably stick with Firefox for element picking and VSCode for development.There's also spacehey which has some helpful old web guides in the forums that you can use if you ignore the zoomer invader zim sparkledog shit (unless you like that, of course) and sadgrl https://goblin-heart.net/sadgrl/webmastery/ for some more guides and tutorials.
>>448611>early 200s web design
>>450706the joke is that the "minimalism" is bloated javascript garbage made for easy of injection of a bunch of malicious ads. its always broken, looks horrible and runs like shit. real minimalism is simple html with hyperlinks websites, which run great and can look incredible.
>>445846nobody cares, reddit. kys
>>454387>web design from pinterest and not from a bookwhat books? please if you want things to get better you should pass along the information for them to get better
>>450447zoomers and ai will bring it back. the dark ages of the millenial internet are coming to and end.
copied this from a post on /g/ extremely redpilled websites http://www.chaosmatrix.org/ https://www.erowid.org/splash.php https://www.erowid.org/library/books/a_books.shtml https://gorgomancy.net/aide.html https://www.spacejam.com/1996/ https://guidebookgallery.org/guis http://www.oldskool.org/ http://simson.net/ref/NeXT/ https://vimm.net/ https://winclassic.github.io/sctguide https://www.asktog.com/ http://hallofshame.gp.co.at/controls.html please recommend me more redpilled websites like those
>>454622Basic CSS will let you do most of it, The menu would likely be some sort of vertical carousel.
A screenshot can't convey that the whole website is one huge flash object that can only be linked from it's home/splash page and cannot be right clicked to copy text or save images. Fuck early 2000s web design.
>>455813like with everything, people got overzealous with what was at the time the new thing and shat out flash objects where they weren't needed to the point of excess, but at the same time i like that this was when the internet was just some place where even commercial websites could be more focused on being cool and weird and not just looking exactly like the 5 most popular websites (which are all heavily phone-oriented).
itt distravcting shit that thankdully did out
>>445839The screws on those diamond metal plate things idk the name of are soooo good, does anyone have any more "metal" designs like those bits specifically?
metal archives site
this too
>>455944That looks nice. Legit feels like a leather bound book. A leather bound website, if you will.
>>451545I honestly did not know they changed the UI by I guess that makes sense.
i get that making these sorts of websites is a lot of experimentation with basic html and css, but does anyone have any resources explaining some of the aspects that drove people to go for certain styles to elicit feelings in the userbase?i wanna make my own kind of website like these but i'm mainly getting stuck on why i'd go for one aesthetic over another, and having a kind of explainer on different 2000s website design philosophies would be really useful, since all i can seem to find so far are to do with operating system UIs.
lolwut
>>455976It was really the rule of cool. Sorry, but there wasn't any design philosophies, lectures, books, etc on this stuff. Things like this:(pic related)http://www.futureexpress.net/fe9_news.htmWere part of the style at the time with some still riding the waves of Y2K, and optimism of the future. They were following the vibes of the time.One thing you can ask yourself to set the thousands of questions that comes to your mind at ease is "What and who is this for?" Its the first step in damn near every marketing book, dating book, strategies for war, etc. Who is your target.These were targeted for kids or parents with their kids:>>445832>>451081>>451082>>451084>>451085>>454521These were target at teenagers and the games they were playing.>>445838>>445893>>451546>>454222These didn't have much of a target other than to look futuristic as well as being an extension of the windows user interface of 98 and XP.Some went overboard, some dialed it back like Deviantart so the art and information that they were presenting wasn't overshadowed by the user interface.>>445831>>445839>>446486>>451083>>451544>>451545Sites like these were made to fit the aesthetic of the show or video game it was made for.>>445877>>454204https://www.mmhp.net/http://soniczone0.comAs many UI designers will tell you, a UI is good when you don't notice it, but the 90s and early 00s were all about how to be noticed. Things to get your attention and entice interaction.Another take away is that a lot of these sites were designed in a way to minimize scrolling. A lot of the layouts were made in a tight box that would fit the browser snuggly with all the information and navigation in one spot.These aren't rules though. they're principles, and the principles you choose are based on the core question of "who or what am I targeting." To come up with a theme.
>>455993this is really helpful, thank you very much anon. not much else i can say aside from that lol thanks a lot, i'll definitely keep this in mind going forward.
>>455993You're supposed to look at the influences. Draw lines as far back as you can. y2k futurism coming out of the collision of 60s mod/space race (itself influenced by 20s/30s serial) and 80s/90s grunge-y cyberpunk. FutureExpress is clearly drawing from logistics marketing(FedEx/DHL)/navigational design (like, signs at airports). It's almost a form of skeuomorphism, saying, "The real world is now the digital world." You look at the examples you want to convey a similar feeling to and ask yourself, "What did they see or experience that pushed them in this direction?"
>>456047Thats a good way to understand some aesthetics origins and why they were made, but anon was asking on which one to choose. Finding a target audience is a very important first step in making that choice.After that, you can ask yourself "What feeling do I want my audience to experience and how can this aesthetic encourage that feeling." find your target audience, and the second esoteric step is "what do I want them to feel". You can't make them feel anything, only encourage it, but the first step finding your target can help guide that second step."Do I want them to feel refreshed, awake and free?" You may use sky blue, water, etc. Images of a sky seems to say "the sky is the limit" for a sense of freedom."Awake and focused". You may use some of the same colors, but you may use shapes and lines that create either a sense of urgency and excitement, or minimal uses of those things to direct their eyes, focus."Family and friendship." You may use images of characters close together, pictures of homes, or more cryptic things. Serial Experiments Lain used wires to symbolize our digital connection, creating a more artificial feel of family and connection with the maze of jumbled wires to capture the feel of disorientation and the ironic sense of isolation while being connected."Built to last, tough." Cars use metal, chrome, and other materials for their graphic designs to show how they are built for strength. Some companies use more square shaped images with these materials to target the working class, others use rounder shapes to target more casual uses of vehicles for daily commute or luxury.These aren't the best examples, but you get the gist. Target first, then the other questions fall into place to facilitate who you're targeting.
>>456050One more thing.If you're having trouble finding a target, ask yourself who and why youre choosing your target.Companies want money, so they choose their audiences based on who they can get money from with what tools they have. Be it knowledge or actual tools.McDonalds stopped targeting families and kids and went for the college aged young adults so their ads were made to reflect their lifestyle.Your reason can be less cynical. You chose your audience because there was something you liked about them.If you merely want to express yourself and your personal feelings, then your target are those feelings.
>>445926>>445988>>445989Seems like it was a cult, one of the first online-original ones. This forum thread from 2008 goes into a dive on it:https://forum.culteducation.com/read.php?12,57512Without digging into things too deep (this shit gives me the heebie jeebies and I don't wanna click too many links) it seems like the last postings from its arms were around 2015, so it probably died out near the end of the 2010s./x/ might be a better place to discuss it.Captcha: GVATT
As I grow older, my hatred for mobile design matures. Soon it will bear a fruit, I will become a computer virus and infect the internet and come for the smartphones, the iPads and the Apple watches. I will stomp out the web crawlers. I will corrupt them all. Cutting the net won't spare you, I'll become a floppy flying through your window, slashing your hard drive to bits.
>>455895God, I miss bitmap fonts.A few anons have already mentioned this, but the early flash-heavy stuff was caustic to SEO. Flash wasn't indexable, and If Google couldn't figure out what was in your website, you weren't gonna have reach on search engines.The bigger nail in the coffin was smartphones. Fat buttons and emphasis on verticality was needed for grubby fingers and scrolling, and managing two completely different versions of a website is annoying, so desktop designs were merged with mobile.I think with all the tools we have now, we could easily mimic the experimental websites of yore, even improve upon them with two extra decades of knowledge - but that's too much work!
>>456410>I think with all the tools we have now, we could easily mimic the experimental websites of yore, even improve upon them with two extra decades of knowledge - but that's too much work!too much work AND companies are salivating at the thought of casual desktop usage fully dying out in favor of universal smartphone browsing, so they're definitely not going to be making any cool desktop-oriented websites anytime soon when they could instead be making ugly corporate memphis mobile websites that are really just huge ads to get people to download their app.and honestly, it's also a shame that most of the newer sites i see from hobbyists that are interested in this era (e.g. on places like neocities) just take what was done in the past wholesale without trying to improve on it with the advances in web development that have come since, and that leaves a shitton of bloated and/or ugly imitations of bloated and/or ugly sites from the past. companies wouldn't budge regardless, but a lot of old web revival projects really aren't making a "revival" look like something to be excited for.
>>456411>that are really just huge ads to get people to download their appPrecisely.Startups have always been about building something up rapidly and then selling off the company to the highest bidder, so the founders and investors can get their bag ASAP. However, "startup culture" used to be about actually-innovating in ways the big slow companies (both what preceded the FAANGs and then the early days of that hegemony) couldn't. That rapidly changed as these behemoths actually unfucked themselves. THAT was probably due to Google's "experimental" nature showing you can just live A-B test shit with users and they will bitch but not leave in big enough numbers. As well as a lot of startups spamming growth and big innovative promises and a flashy frontend only to deliver absolute crap code that costs more to fix than to just copy - Skype may have been the biggest lemon sold here, but I could be wrong and it may have been something else earlier, before I was actually paying attention to this shit.Details aside, startups NOW mostly seem to be hell-bent on collecting user data, the product is just a vector to get people to sign away their permission for data collection, so it only has to be "good enough" and last long enough to fit company's projected sale.>But the privacy policy says "we don't sell your data"!!That's the neat trick:They don't.They sell the whole company when it's ripe and ready for market, and with it ALL the company's assets - including the user data that their app and wifi-connected toasters and smart bidets and so on have picked up. That is how they have value now and why everything is app-connected.So, word of wisdom: If you want to do some big project you're passionate about, then crowdfunding or traditional business loans are the better option. VC and angel investors are just interested in getting their ROI ASAP and that involves you losing control of your project.
Back in the day, I was a kid. A teen or preteen (I'm 35). I made TONS of Geocities websites, but I used their webpage editor thing with the graphic interface and the tiles and such you could choose from for backgrounds or add your own. Does anyone remember that? I eventually branched out a little and would mess around with ooooold Windows FrontPage editor. When it came to writing my own code ... nope. I really wish geocities would bring back that interface ...well.. I wish someone would bring back geocities in general, but that would be a fantastic addition.
>>445846trying way too hard to fit in lul
>>446458neocities are bad tho, it deletes your account without warning if you update your web too often. also adding redirect counters too will flag their troony system
>>456411>>446458It really bothers me how a lot of neocities sites try to mindlessly replicate a "vibe" or what kids feel like sites were like back in the olden days without actually thinking about what those sites were trying to do or why. Of course there's plenty of gems but it'll mostly be children spamming as many gifs as they can, which were all found on one website. It's all "style" and no substance. Not what I would want to use to get an idea of older web design or design in general.
Found a twitter page that posts 00s web. Maybe my algo got wind of this thread and pushed it into my feed.@WebDesignMuseum
>>456646
Bros, when the fuck will minimalism die?
>>456646you know they have a website, right?https://www.webdesignmuseum.org/
>>456651For websites?When the main consumption of content changes from smart phones to something else.For everything else?No idea. I can't blame my generation for downsizing a few things. Our parents and grandparents had so much shit crowding our homes and garages that we wanted only the essentials. Only over correcting to the point of soullessness.Fuck I miss when corpos would go all out with there stores and restaurants. They wanted to sell the experience with the product. Now, its all about the product. Take your burger and go.I long for the days not of maximalist or minimalist, but having things be just right.
>>456694>When the main consumption of content changes from smart phones>Gameinformer is shut down>Cartoon Network is shut down.FUCK SMART PHONES, FUCK ZOOMERS.FUCK LEFTIES, FUCK NORMIES, FUUUUCCCCKKK
>>456730Also fuck major social media and browsers. They bottle necked things so hard that it killed so many smaller sites
>>446486>all that artwork lost to time if it wasn't posted elsewhereAlways a painful feeling
Is there even a way to do these cool designs while being responsive to all new resolutions on the market?
>>457071you mean every possible combination of the screen size, x y ratio, orientation, resolution, dpi, font size and zoom level?(i'm implying that there aren't even a fixed set of layouts and resolutions, you can implement a responsive page without @breakpoints by using css flex-basis property to collapse elements on ui component level and a responsive page should work just as well on 192x120 nugget lcd or on a 6000x zoom level as it does on a 1080p monitor with system default font size and zoom level)yeah it is doable but it's more work and much different thinking than adhering for 800x600 and 1024x768 fixed lorem ipsum layout with some raster sprites exported 1:1 from photoshop layers & assumed for a ~15-20in monitorthrow in modern ui keyboard, low vision, high contrast mode, screen reader, copy-writing etc. accessibility requirements + dark mode for a good measureadding 5 redundant toolbars e.g. >>454577 will not pass even the "WHY EVEN" stage of planning such a thing
no you shut up, w3ci WILL use tables to align my layout
About to take on the arduous task of balancing a 'mobile friendly' website and a desktop website.I barely have any content or traffic to give a shit about doing this, but I should get with the times. My WordPress blog posts will have to have a dynamic layout change depending on which device they use. The code to do so doesn't seem too complex. A use of CSS to switch out the JPGS I use and text when a user is on mobile vs desktop. Every post is going to have two <img src=""> to load. Double to work, but damn it, I want something that looks nice.Also going to have to implement an infinite scroll. I'm going to find a way to make it not soulless, I swear.
>>454740I loved that
>>457123>mobile vs desktopit's more to do with screen/window size / zoom level(controlled either by the browser or externally by the os resolution and font size settings). it shouldn't really be 'desktop vs mobile' thinking (the "mobile" ipad pro is desktop size screen for example) but in practice in design stage it may... but i'd avoid css breakpoints as much as possible, ui components ideally should fluid-ly collapse within themselves (flex-basis, flex-wrap, flex-grow/shrink on content) without expecting specific global breakpoint to be triggered. set breakpoints would still be implied in figma/adobexd designs to retain everyone's sanity though.for loading different image per different screen size/zoom level this may be useful:https://www.w3schools.com/TAgs/att_source_srcset.aspall things - text size, element spacing, borders should be sized using sizing em and rem units not px.max(), min(), clamp(), calc() css functions as well. css variables root: { --as: well; }.viewports width and height - vw, wh units are useful as well together with above mentioned fns and units.any icons, patterns and decorative elements should be SVG files.it's possible to generate noisy textures (grain, paper etc) using SVG so no need to pre-make huge filesize png/jpg https://tympanus.net/codrops/2019/02/19/svg-filter-effects-creating-texture-with-feturbulence/i suggest css reset and write everything with css grid and flebox layout models, except maybe text blocks with inline objects (<p> with <strong>, <a> etc).
>>457143basically sizes of everything in page can be set up completely fluid in em/rem with relation to the base font-size (in css on body {...) which can be constrained with clamp() to relate to some clamp(1em, 8vw, 3em) for example
>>457143Thanks man, that was kind of the code I was looking at using to switch jpgs. Also figuring out how to switch text layouts the same way. This works great for my posts to be responsive, but I'm now trying to figure out my links, navigation and layouts to be responsive through my site. There are some wordpress plug-ins to do a theme switch, but there are a lot of 'cables' that I have to connect between the two themes for it to work. Feeling I'm banging my head against the wall while stumbling in the dark. Google also sent me an indexing report."Duplicate without user-selected canonical".Its going to look good once I get it running. /endblogpost
>>457186I actually got it working now. Its not live yet, but its damn near ready. Had to start mostly from scratch to build a wordpress theme, but it was easier than I thought.
>>445831How do you guys even find the links for those (aside from your memory?).
>>456670>>457256
i miss these 'cancer explosions' people made in 3D software back then. Used to be lpads of tutorials on them on deviantart.
>>457258
>>457258*loads
>>457260what a find, looks like the way back machine archived some of those 3d tutorials from this site.https://web.archive.org/web/20040213200247/http://www.shiver7.com/tutorials/108/holyshut, i remember this one.https://web.archive.org/web/20040202083143/http://www.shiver7.com/tutorials/116/
looks cool
>>445846Holy retarded amerifat lol
>>445831Fun fact: The website in OP was designed by Eric Jordanhttps://www.behance.net/gallery/13862445/2Advanced-Studios-V3-Website-(1999)
>>457343That is a fun fact, and there was an interview with him.This has been a good thread.
>>445846nigga trying to hard to look different
Why is half of the thread 404'd?
>>457636idk, it's the whole board
Damn, where do you even go to talk about web development? There isn't even a thread on /g and I have some questions to get CSS working on my individual posts in wordpress. The plug-ins don't work or if it does, it applies it to my entire site, not individual posts.
>>457779Chat gpt
>>457780You're pathetic
>>457779>There isn't even a thread on /gI think you're looking for /wdg/, no?Also, I'm not sure if you've tried this but some of the plug-in developers respond to emails so that may be worth a shot. I had a question about a fairly obscure plug-in and the creator replied within the hour.
So nostalgic!
good thread
All those designers, where are they now? What are they doing now?
Woah
