| |||||||||||||
Happy Run Some Old Web Browsers Day!Happy Run Some Old Web Browsers Day!Posted Apr 1, 2008 2:19 UTC (Tue) by mattdm (guest, #18)Parent article: Happy Run Some Old Web Browsers Day!
None of the "what's new [on the entire web]" links seem to be working anymore. What's wrong with people can't keep a site up for a measly fourteen years?
(Log in to post comments)
1994 download speeds simulated nicely ;-) Posted Apr 1, 2008 2:46 UTC (Tue) by pr1268 (subscriber, #24648) [Link] Well, they did get the page download speed "just right" for 1994. Even with a 8Mbit/sec download connection, I'm watching progressive GIFs with link maps slowly blur into view over the course of 30 seconds... Brings back memories...
1994 download speeds simulated nicely ;-) Posted Apr 1, 2008 8:04 UTC (Tue) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link] ... brings back memories of thinking how *fast* it was after waiting half an hour or more for one of the ancient battered 486s in the Brunel University CS department to finish logging on. (This wasn't because the machines were slow, although they were: it was the network. If a network could melt from collisions, that one would have.)
1994 download speeds simulated nicely ;-) Posted Apr 1, 2008 22:27 UTC (Tue) by Soruk (guest, #2722) [Link] That reminds me of Aberdeen's idea of running an entire lab of about 40 machines on a single segment of 10Base2 (thinnet), and having the machines run their Windows 3.1 swapfiles on a single SPARCstation machine.
1994 download speeds simulated nicely ;-) Posted Apr 2, 2008 0:01 UTC (Wed) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link] I think we had sixty or seventy on a single segment of 10base2, but I'm fairly sure we weren't swapping over the network. (We just did everything *else* over the network...)
Happy Run Some Old Web Browsers Day! Posted Apr 1, 2008 11:17 UTC (Tue) by epa (subscriber, #39769) [Link] Yeah, it sucks to make links to a site which then disappears. It would be useful for websites to have a longevity rating, kind of like a credit rating, which says how likely (based on past behaviour) they are to keep their pages available or at least redirecting to something that makes sense. Then you could take that into account when deciding whether to link to them. This metadata would have been hard to gather in 1993 though ;-P. http://www.w3.org/Provider/Style/URI
Can't do that without time travel Posted Apr 2, 2008 17:46 UTC (Wed) by JoeBuck (subscriber, #2330) [Link] A page can live for ten years and then suddenly disappear because its owner so decides, or forgets to renew the domain.
Can't do that without time travel Posted Apr 3, 2008 15:41 UTC (Thu) by epa (subscriber, #39769) [Link] True - past performance is not necessarily guide to future returns - I think it's a pretty good approximation though. (The number of years left until domain renewal can be used as part of the credit score.)
|
|||||||||||||