7 ms·
Even though there are so many packed buttons and links it seems to like a vastly superior design compared to modern websites. I don't know if it's me being used
by comboy 25d ago
Even though there are so many packed buttons and links it seems to like a vastly superior design compared to modern websites. I don't know if it's me being used to this or if we went wrong somewhere.
- meowcat 25d agoFunny, I entirely disagree. On one hand, the design itself is heartwarming because it's old internet. Also, once you navigate into the topics, things are neatly organized, and there I agree with you. But the content on the main page itself lacks a common thread, no idea where i'm supposed to read or what belongs together.
- cogman10 25d agoI'd say there is a pretty common thread for it, but man is it a mishmash of interests, which really makes it charming. It's certainly not focused. Sure this site is about RF, but the owner decided they'd throw in basically all their interests into one website. I mean, it has crossword puzzles and a jokes page :D This is the site to send someone to who wonders "What was the internet like before Web 2.0".
- Gigachad 25d agoIt’s horrible to use on mobile. Which you may or may not care about, but that’s why this style of design died out.
- jimnotgym 25d agoI just browsed it on mobile. Each article preview is in a little box, just scroll around to it. It works fine for me. The alternative modern mobile view leaves very little on the page, and forces you to click back and fwd, and back button functionality is usually broken. I think it's easier to scroll
- benj111 24d agoHmm. If only we had some sort of language that would allow us to display a page in different ways without losing meaning. Hmm....