[ home / bans / all ] [ qa / jp / cry ] [ aut ] [ f / ec ] [ b / poll ] [ tv / bann ] [ toggle-new / tab2 ]

/qa/ - Questions and Answers

Questions and Answers about QA

New Reply

Options
Comment
File
Whitelist Token
Spoiler
Password (For file deletion.)
Markup tags exist for bold, itallics, header, spoiler etc. as listed in " [options] > View Formatting "


[Return] [Bottom] [Catalog]

File:trixie6a.gif (4 KB,75x100)

 No.74092

Seeing Laura plastered all over Kissu a few days ago felt nice and felt reminiscent of when much more of the internet was covered in cute anime. It made me wonder, how many sites still are styled in the same vein of 90s and early 2000s otaku websites? Does /qa/ know of any still running, or did the vast majority die with Geocities?

Also, to add on to this, why did this style even die out in the first place in favor of the bland white blah most places like MAL/Anidb/Reddit have?

 No.74093

File:90829888.gif (10.52 MB,800x533)

I'm glad you liked it! It took me more time than it should have...
I remember those days fondly, too. I think at least part of is people using so many different resolutions and devices now that there's no one view of a website any more, but a dozen interpretations and it's annoying to make them all compatible with one vision.
Sadly, I think another big part of it is also the maturity paradox people have. The internet is serious business these days, right, so you need to have white backgrounds and black text and squares and flat everything. Why? Because it's what adults do and I'm an adult!

 No.74094

>why did this style even die out in the first place in favor of the bland white blah most places like MAL/Anidb/Reddit have?
because smartphones. you can't really put gifs and images everywhere when your websight needs to work on so many different screens, it's much easier to rely on some template.

like try to browse https://www.metal-archives.com http://hitmaru.sakura.ne.jp/main.html or https://seiya-saiga.com/ on a phone to get an idea

 No.74095

Not to be trite, but do you have a 90s style anime website? Neither do I, neither does the guy two blocks down. The reason they don't exist is because nobody is making them. Then you can ask why aren't people making them---well you won't see it on a big monetized site like MAL, because of copyright infringement, and smaller personal/hobby websites are less common. (Whether they are truly less common in number or in ratio, or just harder to find, well beats me. Certainly can't find anything off the beaten path with any major web search provider).

 No.74096

File:Sailor Moon R The Movie 19….jpg (330.43 KB,1920x1080)

>>74094
Death to all phoneposters!

 No.74097

Maybe we should all make neocities pages
but I'm lazy

 No.74101

File:10FE2991-D120-4776-A78D-3….jpeg (112.09 KB,547x474)


 No.74103

>>74094
Doesn't that have more to do with the <table> based layout than the aesthetic? You could make those sites work fine on a phone with some updated CSS.

 No.74105

>>74097
I'm not a big fan of neocities. It's too self aware and cynical. The thing I liked about geocities was that it was very earnest and kind of existed in its own world. Neocities knows what it is and what it is is a community that's bitter about the larger web.

 No.74108

>Also, to add on to this, why did this style even die out in the first place in favor of the bland white blah most places like MAL/Anidb/Reddit have?
In all honestly, it's because most people think it looks like shit. The garish colors, quirky layouts, and boatloads of animated gifs are super nostalgic if you grew up with them, but to everyone else it just looks sloppy and amateurish. The pure white style is boring, but if you're a dad in his 40s who only uses the web to order new furniture, it's more than good enough.

 No.74109

>>74108
Sloppy and amateurish more fit a style of internet by the people than a web by corporations.

 No.74111

>>74109
But as it turns out, "the people" don't really have any interest in making their own websites. Social media already does everything they want, so they use that instead.

The web started getting blander because normal people with bland tastes started using it. Blame the corporations all you want, but they're simply offering a service.

 No.74113

Misaki Nakahara when?

 No.74115

I'd like to plaster my cum all over Laura

 No.74116

epic bro

 No.74137

File:1568946533528.gif (2.17 MB,900x515)


 No.74350


 No.74352

here's a nice ancient forum
https://anikoichi.forumotion.com/

 No.74357

I'd like to see more people combine the personalty of older websites with modern technology and design principals. Kissu's new UI is actually a pretty good example of this, especially with the default luna theme.

 No.74358

>>74350
White background. Black text. Squares. Flat colors.
Yep, it's today's sleek and mature internet for serious adults... or something.
Did webpage designers just convince their clients that it looked good so they didn't need to do anything? I don't think smartphones have trouble displaying text on colored backgrounds, right? Why is the web so boring now?

 No.74359

>>74358
Nothing is more profitable than something. If you have something, people could decide that they dislike it and go somewhere else. Putting everything right is the safest choice, and corporations always prefer the safe option.

 No.74360

>>74350
>modern forums
That thread goes back to 2006.

 No.74362

>>74360
ah yes, the good old days.

 No.74363

>>74360
moviecodec was always simple design, but even back in 2006 the standard for simple looked much better than the abomination that link gives you.

http://web.archive.org/web/20060830135512/http://www.moviecodec.com/

 No.74365

>>74363
> Open why aintg no fuck gay ass wipes posting on my fuck threads
> ( . )Y( . )
> fuck my stupid lil assel reapin shit fucking boob licking penis
> big fucking dick!
This Zelda Sucks guy sounds like a blast.

 No.74366

>>74363
"Abomination" is a bit of a strong word. The new one's definitely way blander, but it's not eye gougingly horrible. From an objective design standpoint it's probably actually better.

 No.74368

>>74366
> From an objective design standpoint it's probably actually better.
What do you even mean by this?

 No.74369

>>74366
Relevant info about the post is shoved to the side like the date it was made, everything is in a block of white that extends down like a blob, and where you could once see maybe a dozen one line posts per page it only shows like 4 now with an abhorrent amount of white space. Even objectively it looks like shit.

 No.74370

>>74363
>abomination
>>74369
>abhorrent
Chill out dude.

 No.74371

>>74370
what? you got a problem with words that start with "a"?

 No.74372

>>74371
Maybe I'm reading it wrong, but I feel like you're getting too worked up about this.

 No.74373

>>74372
If you don't have anything to say, you don't need to make up for it by getting mad at people who do. Is it a crime to care about something?

 No.74374

File:waterfox_BWdnfy7GOY.png (96.1 KB,589x228)

>>74363
That's a lot better than the current one, though.
1. COLOR!
2. Shaded buttons. They even look like irl folder tabs!
3. Non-standard font for site name at the top!
4. Rounded edges!

It may seem minor, but all of these things together make a more relaxed and personal website instead of the web equivilent of a buzzing white neon light in an office.

 No.74375

>>74374
>though
I thought that's what I said...?

 No.74376

>>74373
What? I'm not mad, I just think you need to calm down a bit. It's fine to care about something, but if you care enough that it gets you upset enough to call something an abomination you care too much.

>>74374
>relaxed and personal
There's your problem. Most websites don't want to be personal. They want to be "professional". They want to project the image that they're being run by a big important company who hired a professional designer. It's the visual equivalent of a skyscraper.

 No.74377

>>74376
I'd say it's more akin to a traditional office building than a skyscraper. There's some nice design in them.

 No.74378

>>74377
*in skyscrapers

 No.74379

>>74377
>>74378
Good point.

 No.74380

>>74375
Err, yeah. I guess I shouldn't have directed that at you. I was just explaining why I think it's a lot better

 No.74382

Functional websites aren't trying to look nice, they're trying to be clean so people can quickly find what they're looking for.

Having style alienates certain people and attracts others. A website that's having a wide range of users with many tastes prefers the sterile look over the stylized.

 No.74444





[Return] [Top] [Catalog] [Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]

[ home / bans / all ] [ qa / jp / cry ] [ aut ] [ f / ec ] [ b / poll ] [ tv / bann ] [ toggle-new / tab2 ]