Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
- Status
The internet is big nightmare now. It is really crazy you have Firefox running and 12 tabs open and nothing else running and you are using 3GB of RAM. Using windows. ? The bloat windows has become and Firefox. Yes 3GB of RAM used running Firefox with 12 tabs open. It should be using 1 GB at most and even that is lot.
Well sure I have new iPad not even year old with blazing hardware spects and so fast but going to cnet.com or PCworld.com makes me want to vomit using the iPad or a 8 year old laptop because of the bloat and obnoxious video pop up that starts playing and does not want to go away.
Going to CNN or https://www.theguardian.com makes me want to vomit.
The bloat and video pop ups that start playing on many news web sites and tech web sites with no setting to turn it off.
The auto play feature turn on makes me want to scream. Why have videos on the web site ?? and if you are going to have video on the web site well allow me to start the video. Why have video turn on by default and pop up and scroll down with me well I scroll down the page.
Many times I go to website and video starts playing scarring me as I did not press the play button and forget I had my volume turn up high being in a room with no noise for x time and video starts playing and I look on the page or scroll up or down and see the video on the page start playing on its own.
In the year 2010 if you had 4GB of RAM you where a gamer. Now base standard 8 GB of RAM.
Well you could use laptop using 4GB of RAM you going to be checking windows task-manger and always checking your running apps or too many tabs open and closing it.
Google earth takes 4GB of RAM running windows and with firefox running with say 12 tabs you close to 8 GB RAM!!
You cannot use a computer with 1GB of RAM using a very light Linux distro because the internet is bloated and so is Firefox.
IMO it has been for quite some time already, for one reason or another. Tip: use a script blocker in addition to an ad blocker. This stops videos from automatically playing and puts an end to quite a bit of other nonsense too.
Last edited:
I don’t really remember looking at videos in the late 90s or 2000s it was mostly text and pictures back than. And pictures back than where not 1920 x 1080 because people did not have 1920 x 1080 monitors or even 720p monitors.You didn't stream videos back then. Well, not as we know and experience streaming nowadays. Remember that most people were on analogue modems with transfer speeds of 33.6 to 56kbps. The average 720p YouTube video requires about 2,500kbps — over 50x the average capacity of a modem. Thus to do something like "watch a 720p music video" that was 4 minutes long, you would first spend 200 minutes — nearly three and a half hours — downloading, followed by 4 minutes of watching. Nothing at all like what we are used to nowadays.
In practice, a lot of mid-late 90s "streamed" video ended up being in resolutions like 120x90 or 160x120 and were then simply stretched to fit the user's screen — often 640x480 — making for a pixellated/blurry viewing experience.
Most folk today would consider something like '90p' or '120p' to be "unwatchable".
Within a browser like Netscape Navigator, a link to the video file would be tagged with a 'content type' (similar to MIME type), and either an external program would be launched to handle it, or the code in a browser 'plug-in' would be invoked to handle it. You usually had to wait a long, long time before enough of the file had buffered so you had even a chance of playing it smoothly to the end.
Since buffer memory allocated to video and audio plug-ins was often improperly handled, it was common for errors to occur which would over-write/-run the buffer and crash the browser. Since these browsers were running on a cooperative multi-tasking operating system, when the browser froze it would often/usually take the OS with it, and force a hard reboot. Corrupt browser caches were common as a result, and many of us located our browser caches to RAM Disks to prevent the corruption from spreading to the filesystem on the HDD.
Fun times.
By the mid 2000s to late 2000s there was videos but it was not 1920 x 1080.
When I first gone to youtube it started of has a cat video website and funny home videos. At that time the quality was more like VHS short yes short less than 4 minute clip. Than later youtube started posting 720p and 1080p
Well wikipedia is saying youtube started in February 14, 2005
Well from 2005 to 2010 videos where very short clips mostly VHS quality some even worse from what I remember. And 95% of the time from 2005 to 2010 I did not look at videos.
After 2010 I started to look at videos and slowly got more and more by year by year.
Even from 2010 to 2015 youtube had lot of short video clips.
You possibly can if you switch to a text-based browser. That’s a big change from something like Firefox but it’s awesome for reducing news websites to what matters: TEXT.
By 2010, 4 GB RAM had pretty much become standard, low-end machines excluded. My main machine had 4 GB in 2007 and 8 GB in 2010. (I’ve been a heavy user of virtual machines since 2000 or so and these eat RAM for breakfast.)
Last edited:
there is a site called SpaceHey that is a recreation of mid 2000s MySpace, im not sure if it would be allowed on here though since i assume it uses quite a bit of javascript. but it is very lightweight, even rendering fine on retrozilla & classilla, with web 2.0-ish code
spacehey.com
SpaceHey — a space for friends.
SpaceHey is a retro social network focused on privacy and customizability. It's a friendly place to have fun, meet friends, and be creative. Join for free!
spacehey.com
@originaldotexe That is impressive. I'll give it a try on Safari 4 when I can and then add it in depending on the results.
What's more, it looks like different groups on the Internet coming up with their own renditions of "Web 1.1" are all the rage!
forum.spacehey.com
What's more, it looks like different groups on the Internet coming up with their own renditions of "Web 1.1" are all the rage!
A list of all the "old web" revival services I know of - please help expand it! - Web, HTML, Tech Forum | SpaceHey
Over the past year or so, I've been signing up for a load of old websites/services that are made to mimic/copy/revive old sites/services that have been drastica...
forum.spacehey.com
Last edited:
this site even supports custom css/html styling for your profile like the original myspace. i made a custom style for my profile, you can see it at: https://spacehey.com/profile?id=1112435@originaldotexe That is impressive. I'll give it a try on Safari 4 when I can and then add it in depending on the results.
What's more, it looks like different groups on the Internet coming up with their own renditions of "Web 1.1" are all the rage!
A list of all the "old web" revival services I know of - please help expand it! - Web, HTML, Tech Forum | SpaceHey
Over the past year or so, I've been signing up for a load of old websites/services that are made to mimic/copy/revive old sites/services that have been drastica...
hi, i removed my site from the list as i am starting an IT career and it is more of a personal site now with some career-related things and the abandonware downloads have been removed, and is no longer web 1.1 compatible. i will add another site to the list, which is owned by my friend and has a lot of the same abandonware downloads and many more.
there is a site called SpaceHey that is a recreation of mid 2000s MySpace, im not sure if it would be allowed on here though since i assume it uses quite a bit of javascript. but it is very lightweight, even rendering fine on retrozilla & classilla, with web 2.0-ish code
SpaceHey — a space for friends.
SpaceHey is a retro social network focused on privacy and customizability. It's a friendly place to have fun, meet friends, and be creative. Join for free!
That looks great - will try later on my Sawtooth I'm tinkering with....
Alas, I consider myself far too old to join in the fun though
One is never too old for funAlas, I consider myself far too old to join in the fun though
I draw the line at Gen Zeds reliving their schooldaysOne is never too old for fun
At some point, I hope that enough websites are Web 1.x compliant (whether they set out to specifically be Web 1.1 or not) that I can ditch 3.0, and probably 2.0, besides YouTube and Bandcamp to upload onto. I still plan on making my own websites 1.0.5 compliant, mainly because I'm not technically proficient enough to meet the full 1.1 spec. Gopher also looks pretty promising, though I bet it'll get feature creep the more people pile onto it looking for relief from the behemoth.
What's a good authoring software? I can write websites myself, my personal Neocities website is hand-written, but I find it really tedious and it's contributed to me not updating it very frequently. I've been using SeaMonkey Composer for the last few years but it feels kinda limiting.
What's a good authoring software? I can write websites myself, my personal Neocities website is hand-written, but I find it really tedious and it's contributed to me not updating it very frequently. I've been using SeaMonkey Composer for the last few years but it feels kinda limiting.
@originaldotexe That is impressive. I'll give it a try on Safari 4 when I can and then add it in depending on the results.
What's more, it looks like different groups on the Internet coming up with their own renditions of "Web 1.1" are all the rage!
A list of all the "old web" revival services I know of - please help expand it! - Web, HTML, Tech Forum | SpaceHey
Over the past year or so, I've been signing up for a load of old websites/services that are made to mimic/copy/revive old sites/services that have been drastica...
Regarding VidLii and BitView, I actually have history with those two websites (and the predecessor to both, VidBit, and the predecessor to that, ZippCast -- it was the absolute best of them and even then had content that was so bland that the most subscribed person was The Mysterious Mr. Enter; at least, when you didn't encounter a TLS error). I'd recommend avoiding them at all costs, as the former at least is riddled with enough malicious ads to make the Daily Mail blush and both have probably the worst cesspools of communities comprising hordes of teenagers perpetually fawning over tHe GoOD oLD dAyS that they were too three years old to have ever experienced ever brought under a single roof. There is no worthwhile content on either site, and the fact that you need seven proxies and a condom to be safe on the former means that it's not worth it to try to change that.
Really, a good rule of thumb is that anything predicated on capturing nostalgia rather than being a good example of its category and using nostalgia as a side gimmick is going to be utter trash to be kept clear of. The second you see the word "retro" appear, it's essentially the death knell.
Also, AFAIK, most of the listed sites require encryption too new to be used on any but the most modern of web browsers. Testing a few examples out in even non-LWK Leopard Safari is leading to every one of them having encryption too new for Sorbet Leopard, let alone OS 9.
Really, a good rule of thumb is that anything predicated on capturing nostalgia rather than being a good example of its category and using nostalgia as a side gimmick is going to be utter trash to be kept clear of. The second you see the word "retro" appear, it's essentially the death knell.
Also, AFAIK, most of the listed sites require encryption too new to be used on any but the most modern of web browsers. Testing a few examples out in even non-LWK Leopard Safari is leading to every one of them having encryption too new for Sorbet Leopard, let alone OS 9.
Last edited:
I 100% agree with this but as discussed on another moderator decimated thread, the herd holds sway and Web 1.1 partying like it's 1999 is what punters want
Who cares about what punters want?I 100% agree with this but as discussed on another moderator decimated thread, the herd holds sway and Web 1.1 partying like it's 1999 is what punters want
We've got our niches.Oh, how I hate that word. To me, it's become the epitome of capitalising on feelings of nostalgia. Rant over.
Last edited:
Actually, it's the niches I'm talking about - most people want their sites to look retro.Who cares about what punters want?
Having said that, there are obvious design constraints from working within such limited boundaries.
@lepidotós The full 1.1 spec is a theoretical maximum, not a base standard. One may code exclusively in HTML3 / CSS1, or even use no CSS at all and just HTML1 if they wish, and still be fully compliant. What would not qualify for Web 1.1 certification on the other hand, is emulating places like YouTube, Facebook, Wix, etc. on the framework and / or security side.
I know that people have used authoring packages such as Rapidweaver, iWeb, and others to build their websites, but from the beginning, I personally chose to hand-write all of reFlash's ~204 (and counting) web pages from the ground up. And I still maintain them all by hand, because even the authoring software packages of the time are still too unoptimized in general for my taste.
With that said, your mileage may vary.
-
In any case, I've noticed in recent times that it turns out that "Web 1.1" is essentially just a more developed iteration of a broader pre-existing phenomenon comprised of what (usually) seems to be an army of teenagers to twenty-somethings yearning for a time when the Web was simpler and not anywhere near as corrupt; and completely understandably so, as Big Tech and Big Data has ruined everything in the last 10+ years they've taken root.
So in regards to the SpaceHey old web sites, I think in the end, we all want the same thing - and that is very good, because there is strength in numbers. If this underground phenomenon continues to pick up steam in the following years (whether it's merely branded as "Web 1.1" or something other), I think there is a very real chance that it could eventually put an actual dent in what we've come to know as Web 2.0 / 3.0 / Trendy-Lazy-Web-Devs-JavaScript-Hell, in time creating its own fully-featured ecosystem where people can viably choose to both contribute to and rely on instead of the former.
Everything comes down to supply and demand.
@Dronecatcher I think we should also take into account the overall culture going on between then and now though, which I think is a major factor as to why people more or less want it to party like 1999 instead of 2019. Culturally, things have changed in a big way. Without going into detail, it goes without saying that some people aren't at all comfortable with these changes around them that others have meanwhile accepted as the bases of their entire lives.
So instead of starting a cultural movement / widespread change in perspective to shape reality back to how they wish it to look (which is a nigh impossible endeavor even for an entire group of people, and something you will also likely spend the better part of your life trying to achieve), they instead opt to simply transport themselves back to a time period where they perceived everything was more in-spec to their desires, and therein fulfill the intrinsic human need for a personalized sense of stability - without potentially disrupting everyone else around them, if that makes sense.
With that being said, I understand your point and I agree; I think the current landscape (whatever it may concern) still needs to be modified for the better, but as I see it, that's not to say we can't still go back in time however often we like to take inspiration for how the future ought to be shaped all the while.
I know that people have used authoring packages such as Rapidweaver, iWeb, and others to build their websites, but from the beginning, I personally chose to hand-write all of reFlash's ~204 (and counting) web pages from the ground up. And I still maintain them all by hand, because even the authoring software packages of the time are still too unoptimized in general for my taste.
With that said, your mileage may vary.
-
In any case, I've noticed in recent times that it turns out that "Web 1.1" is essentially just a more developed iteration of a broader pre-existing phenomenon comprised of what (usually) seems to be an army of teenagers to twenty-somethings yearning for a time when the Web was simpler and not anywhere near as corrupt; and completely understandably so, as Big Tech and Big Data has ruined everything in the last 10+ years they've taken root.
So in regards to the SpaceHey old web sites, I think in the end, we all want the same thing - and that is very good, because there is strength in numbers. If this underground phenomenon continues to pick up steam in the following years (whether it's merely branded as "Web 1.1" or something other), I think there is a very real chance that it could eventually put an actual dent in what we've come to know as Web 2.0 / 3.0 / Trendy-Lazy-Web-Devs-JavaScript-Hell, in time creating its own fully-featured ecosystem where people can viably choose to both contribute to and rely on instead of the former.
Everything comes down to supply and demand.
@Dronecatcher I think we should also take into account the overall culture going on between then and now though, which I think is a major factor as to why people more or less want it to party like 1999 instead of 2019. Culturally, things have changed in a big way. Without going into detail, it goes without saying that some people aren't at all comfortable with these changes around them that others have meanwhile accepted as the bases of their entire lives.
So instead of starting a cultural movement / widespread change in perspective to shape reality back to how they wish it to look (which is a nigh impossible endeavor even for an entire group of people, and something you will also likely spend the better part of your life trying to achieve), they instead opt to simply transport themselves back to a time period where they perceived everything was more in-spec to their desires, and therein fulfill the intrinsic human need for a personalized sense of stability - without potentially disrupting everyone else around them, if that makes sense.
With that being said, I understand your point and I agree; I think the current landscape (whatever it may concern) still needs to be modified for the better, but as I see it, that's not to say we can't still go back in time however often we like to take inspiration for how the future ought to be shaped all the while.
@Dronecatcher
I honestly don't inherently mind a site going for a '90s look. The Jul forums (and really, any acmlmboards-powered forum, and most of the rusted logic webring in general) look very nice in part because of how much they resemble the Internet ca. 1998, with small, colorful elements and information density that looks good at lower resolutions. But they still have a point besides just the vague idea of "experiencing the '90s".
@z970
Hopefully so. One of the sites I'm working on is a static alternative to a Discord homebrew server, so that should help for quick reference for those who are using Windows 9x to make use of the official toolchain.
I'm debating whether to include an acmlmboard on it, because I don't want to lock out computers due to encryption. I suppose there is the Discord server for now.
I honestly don't inherently mind a site going for a '90s look. The Jul forums (and really, any acmlmboards-powered forum, and most of the rusted logic webring in general) look very nice in part because of how much they resemble the Internet ca. 1998, with small, colorful elements and information density that looks good at lower resolutions. But they still have a point besides just the vague idea of "experiencing the '90s".
@z970
Hopefully so. One of the sites I'm working on is a static alternative to a Discord homebrew server, so that should help for quick reference for those who are using Windows 9x to make use of the official toolchain.
I'm debating whether to include an acmlmboard on it, because I don't want to lock out computers due to encryption. I suppose there is the Discord server for now.
Last edited:
I like this idea a lot !!! Its time to get rid of 2022 web and use 2000's web ! But here is million dollar question - Can I use OS 9 with any of this websites ? Netscape? IE 5.1.7, Classila ?
That's the idea. Not all the websites that label themselves "retro" or have the idea can be accessed from those browsers without help -- Neocities, for instance, requires TLS 1.3, but the ones on the OP should be.
Maybe this might make OS 9 better again, and we can use it.. maybe not for youtube.. but for the actual web. I wouldn't mind taking my titanium with me to coffee shop and use OS 9 to browse the web.
Besides just making Mac OS 9 more usable, this hopefully makes even modern PCs slightly more bearable and slightly less disposable.