18 comments

[ 2.7 ms ] story [ 40.8 ms ] thread
This is just a static html site, no? Using build packs or npm for a static page doesn’t even make sense. While I appreciate the throw back design, there’s nothing retro about sticking html files in the public folder; it’s just the correct way to deploy simple static pages (I’ve got a half dozen sites deployed exactly in that way).
The retro part is encouraging beginers to learn to edit html on their own computer, and quickly have a personal space.
Yes, I think that's an important part of the experience. One can edit some text, some CSS/JS if desired (optional), and immediately see the effect. Publish it and now your changes are global.
It’s a well done homage - but no one should believe for one second the actual average page back then looked _that good_!
> Last updated: Monday, September 11761, 1993

Very, very nice.

It would be cool if there's was a public "explore" page to see the sites that currently exist, similar to Neocities.
What has changed now? I still upload my static web content to my ~/public_html folder on live website, using sftp. Anything wrong with that? Why people coming up with this kind of news? The other day someone was saying scripting the HTML Table element using DOM API is gone.

Check internic.net landing page. Not changed in decades. You don't need to be so desperate for change.

This is an homage to the 90s only in the sense that public HTML hosting was more popular in the 90s. Everything about this seems like a modern project (in both design and ideals) with a very inaccurate "retro" coat of paint.

- Site makes use of HTML5 and modern JS. Why bemoan modern frameworks and then use modern, bloated elements?

- Why is there a completely modern register/sign in section in the middle of the home page? Why do young people think every website used to have a marquee? Why does it look like a facsimile of a borderless Windows 95 window? Why the emojis everywhere? Why is there a text shadow effect done with CSS when the 90s way would be to use an image of the text with the effect already replied, with ALT text for text browsers? So many odd design decisions.

- Long content moderation policy talking about how the site is for "Marxist, Communist, Anarchist, Feminist, Postcolonial, Abolitionist, Racial Justice, Queer, Hacker, and Pirate cultures." and how things the site owner doesn't like will be removed.

- The about page looks written with ChatGPT. "That's it. No webpack. No npm install. No 'building for production.', Just HTML. Just vibes." It then goes on to say that they only have "Passwordless authentication (because it's 2025, not 1995)"

This looks to be yet another project fawning over a time and place that the creator didn't experience or have any significant understanding of whatsoever. It's one thing to look at the past with rose tinted glasses, it's another to have a completely fictionalized view of a past you have no knowledge of and then build a service around it.

> Last updated: Monday, September 11761, 1993

I absolutely LOVE that detail!!

I kinda smile seeing this growing up in the real public_html days… Xanga, Geocities, Angelfire, copying HTML from those old Scholastic books to make my first little interactive Pokemon map to hosting WoW guild sites, DKP boards, CS 1.6 servers.

Feels like we’re back again with vibe-coding, app builders, v0, bolt, lovable, all of it. The AI infra even feels familiar. End users getting back the kind of control we had in the public_html days via cPanel shared-hosting, VPS era. And for backend, it’s Supabase or Neon / Postgres now instead of phpMyAdmin and MySQL.

Full circle~

BETA tag is pretty slick. The U+1F6A7 under construction U+1F6A7 banner is more like it...
Cool site, what software do you use? I like Frontpage 2000, but I'm hearing good things about Dreamweaver. Can anyone recommend a good WYSIWYG editor that creates conformant HTML 4.01?