The technical implementation details not being historically accurate don’t matter IMO.
It’s about the aesthetics and the spirit.
I feel at home.
See also Prof. Dr. style which is related though a bit more toned down. http://contemporary-home-computing.org/prof-dr-style/
Same, it doesn't matter. If anything, the fact that both this page and the movie itself use modern techniques to convey '95 style and setting just adds to the experience.
Also, fun thing I noticed, if you google for <marquee> a part of the results page scrolls side to side, like marquee would!
I imagine you might be able to pull off <marquee> tags without additional markup, but I'm not sure.
Some unrequested advice on ethics:
I really understand your pragmatism, but in defending the way things are at this point, you are indirectly defending the consequences, even if you don't directly support these consequences.
This sounds weirdly stern (we're talking about web development, not, say, the Middle East) but I think this applies to everything we do.
When you choose to use a tool or a technique because everyone else is doing it, you are endorsing the status quo and its harmful or positive side effects, to some degree. Defending the way things are right now isn't wrong by itself, but it is not a neutral action.
But when those same coders come home and defend the practice just because they have to do it for work I'm a bit confused. It shouldn't be controversial that this is a bad thing. I'd guess it's sunk costs type thinking.
Viewing a real 1995 site on a mobile device is not as pleasant.
I seem to recall that Western or Latin-1 encoding was more common (or at least, Netscape would assume) than UTF-8 in 1995. This resulted in some sites not displaying Russian characters correctly when you visited a site that didn't specify the encoding. Manually setting the encoding at times would be required.
What is a little strange is that I'm starting to see these sites as fun and refreshing as opposed to annoying and obtrusive. I wonder if we are getting close to a flip in design tastes away from making UX as minimal as possible.
It's my first year as faculty and I already make cultural references that go over their heads. Not a good sign...
1) You can clearly tell what's a link or a button.
2) It doesn't break scrolling or the back button.
The last time I can remember that feeling is when I first arrived at college. The LAN network in the college was connected to the largest backbone link in the country. We had download speeds of 1mb / second. It blitzed through geocities sites.
What sort of compression is it where all the colors are comprised of cross+star shapes? How would you compress these images to look like this in 2019?
PS: Plz join my webring ;)
The version in the upcoming film is also called Ms. Marvel.
- National Comics (the predecessor to DC) made Superman comics
- Fawcett Comics made Captain Marvel comics, inspired by Superman
- Fawcett's Captain Marvel and spinoffs became more popular than Superman
- National sued Fawcett, and in the lawsuit it came out that some Captain Marvel stories were direct copies of Superman stories with the characters swapped
- Fawcett settled the lawsuit and shut down Captain Marvel production
- Over a decade later, Marvel Comics started publishing their own Captain Marvel (a different character aside from the name) and got the trademark on the name
- DC, as successor to National, licensed and later bought out the Fawcett Captain Marvel, then added him to their own universe alongside Superman
That's how you get to a Marvel movie titled "Captain Marvel" featuring Captain Marvel, and a DC movie titled "Shazam!" featuring the other Captain Marvel, even though the now-DC one came first.
The gist is that when Captain Marvel was shut down, the British publisher came up with a knockoff called Marvelman, who then went through a comparable set of rights battles and name changes, becoming Captain Miracle, then Marvelman again, then Miracleman, then Man of Miracles (when eventually bought up by Marvel, weirdly enough).
Along the way, there was a really disturbing run in the '80s written by Alan Moore, which was out of print for years because of the rights battles, and also bits from Neil Gaiman and Grant Morrison. Oh, and a villain called Young Nastyman, who turns up in a Tenacious D song.
(NB: Look at the guest book)
"Is anyone else concerned about Y2K?!?" :D