Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

It's a good start, but the CSS is obnoxious and definitely not low-tech, and the image dithering is a bad compromise between having real images and simply not having images at all. In short, it's an attempt at a low-tech website made by people who've never seen a real low-tech website, and probably wouldn't know Lynx if they saw it in use.


Doesn't this seem a bit uncharitable a characterization? What's an example of a "real low-tech website" that does better than the work presented here? Are you browsing hackernews using lynx or surfraw?


https://yarchive.net/

That's a low-tech website. Absolutely nothing but content.


According to the article, the goal here was to demonstrate the possibility of making an attractive, modern-looking Web page while still having it be lightweight. Your example does not achieve the first goal at all.


this is typical motherfuckingwebsite.com vs bettermotherfuckingwebsite.com.

The design team of solar.lowtechmagazine.com is squarely on the side of the bettermotherfuckingwebsite.com




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: