[HN Gopher] The 88x31 GIF Collection ___________________________________________________________________ The 88x31 GIF Collection Author : kaeruct Score : 328 points Date : 2021-06-14 08:57 UTC (1 days ago) (HTM) web link (cyber.dabamos.de) (TXT) w3m dump (cyber.dabamos.de) | xwdv wrote: | Would it be better to store these as binary blobs in a database? | bbrks wrote: | For those who may be wondering why 88x31px? | | https://www.quora.com/How-did-the-odd-size-of-88x31-become-a... | bluedino wrote: | >> At this point in time the largest provider of personal | hosting was GeoCities. In order to improve brand awareness, | they required that all free hosting users have a link back to | GeoCities somewhere on the page. They helpfully provided | default banners for these links at - you guessed it - the | dimensions of 88x31 | | But that doesn't really explain why 83x31 was chosen by | Geocities | sverhagen wrote: | Still not explaining "why", but Wikipedia suggests that it | was part of a list of standardized sizes, this one being a | "micro bar": | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_banner#Standard_sizes | sedatk wrote: | It probably became a standard _after_ it got popular. | donio wrote: | My guess is that the creator of the first image didn't have | an exact size in mind so when they were doodling in the | bitmap editor it just happened to come out to that size and | was trimmed accordingly. And then future images were made to | fit. | zamadatix wrote: | "why one place picked something" doesn't require special | reasoning like "why everyone picked something" does. | bluedino wrote: | I know, but I was hoping for something like "you could fit | 4 of the buttons in a browser window, on a 640x480 screen" | (the standard of the time) | jandrese wrote: | It fit the font they chose. The designer probably didn't care | how many pixels were in the image so long as it looked ok on | their screen. | tpmx wrote: | https://neonaut.neocities.org/cyber/88x31.html | | _Why 88 by 31, anyway? Who started this? A Quora poster | speculates GeoCities started this trend when they provided | 88x31 GeoCities buttons for their users, but the contemporary | source she references actually says the trend was started by | Netscape._ | qwertox wrote: | I also associate that button very strongly with Netscape. I | was surprised to not see one which had the Netscape logo on | it, only a "Netscape Now" button was there among other "Now" | buttons. | | I wonder if the 31px height was from the height of the logo | on the right of the address bar, the one which was animated. | I don't know which height it was, but it could match. | flixic wrote: | Seeing Netflix in Page 3 is disorienting. Reminds you that it's | actually a pretty old company. | maxpert wrote: | Ahhhh the good old days! Takes me back to dream weaver and flash | era. | neiman wrote: | The forefather of NFTs. | treesknees wrote: | I still have a collection of these 88x31 GIFs from my own | websites back in the day. I never ran anything worth sharing with | anyone else nowadays but it was pretty fun as a kid trying to | build up services and hosting. There was a whole network of | people trading "affiliate" banners, linking back and forth to | each other's websites. Good times! | Minor49er wrote: | I'd be more nostalgiac for these if Neocities pages didn't | continue the trend of creating and sharing them. The bottom of | this page offers a common example: | | https://personally-comfy.neocities.org/ | squiggleblaz wrote: | When I see Linux advocacy from those days it's so amusing to me | in retrospect: In this case, Linux 2.0 now, with Tux dropping | onto an old Windows 95 style logo. I remember GNU/Linux advocacy | in that era as based around free software ideas, but when I look | back at that time, there was actually a lot of ironic(?) | superiority. | runawaybottle wrote: | Today's dose of memberberries. | GIFnotGIF wrote: | nice! | crocal wrote: | It's so useless it's needed. | jordemort wrote: | Some of these seem anachronistic; for example, there are couple | for (and one against!) Discord. According to Wikipedia, Discord | was released in 2015, which seems long after peak 88x31 GIF. | pcan77 wrote: | I miss this version of the internet :( Everything is so boring | now. | ExtraServings wrote: | They should have built the site in Tailwind... | [deleted] | Nadya wrote: | It's harder to find but it still exists. The hardest part is | finding the retroscape <communities> rather than | individuals/people. For example, I can browse a lot of retro- | ish early 2000's design sites on Neocities but it is difficult | to call it much of a community. Same thing with mmm.page. | | https://neocities.org/browse and recently-posted-to-HN | https://mmm.page/xh.inspiring | | I'd love to find (or even make) a community for people who | still enjoy the aesthetic of the amateur-crafted web. | have_faith wrote: | Try wiby.org, hit 'surprise me' a few times. | grae_QED wrote: | Go to https://www.wiby.me | | Its a search engine that only indexes minimalist websites. | Everything on there looks like its from the 90's. | xnx wrote: | For anyone nostalgic for this type of old/weird internet, you | should check out TikTok before it becomes too | commercial/formalized. Still a lot of weird/random/raw stuff on | there. | unicornporn wrote: | I'm sincerely hoping that was a sarcastic comment. | tomcooks wrote: | So many questions about that "Anti code and run" | | http://cyber.dabamos.de/88x31/anticodeandrun2.gif | squiggleblaz wrote: | Why? Do you like writing code that causes your computer to | explode and catch fire so you have to run away from it? | uncomputation wrote: | This page is a great example to show the benefits of caching | eat_veggies wrote: | It's so wonderful seeing the images slowly pop into existence | like that! | dmd wrote: | What do you mean? They all appeared at once for me. | treve wrote: | Would love to compare this to a HTTP/2 version! | 101008 wrote: | Oh I wish I could go back. I remember that these were used a lot | for Affiliates links in the sidebar, if you had a niche website. | Then, they evolved to a 88x16 size, or at least that's what I | remember. | | I used to spend a lot of hours creating those for my website... | So great times, so many memories... I don't remember being happy | back then, but I am sure I was, just that I didnt know. | controlledchaos wrote: | The internet really is for porn. | FridayoLeary wrote: | If anyone is planning on using any of those GIFs on their | websites i have a request: don't. They are extremely annoying and | distracting when i'm trying to read and they give me a headache. | I'm not sure why any websites use GIFs. But _very_ impressive | collection nonetheless. | duskwuff wrote: | Wow, that is quite the variety of banners. Everything from | (unironic) "Netscape Now" animations and RealPlayer banners to | Discord and Mastodon promos. | bastardoperator wrote: | I miss these days, thanks for sharing. | mckeed wrote: | I saw digital blasphemy on there. I checked and it still exists | and he's still updating! | pkulak wrote: | That Covid-19 one sure was prescient. | slver wrote: | Reminded me of this: | | http://www.milliondollarhomepage.com/ | | ...and how many of the ads on this page are for "pixel ads" (no | longer functioning of course). | 52-6F-62 wrote: | Oh wow. I remember writing my first website and coveting those | little banners. All the _real_ websites had them outline their | community associations and capabilities. | | Oh, my website is just a bit of text in some awful arrangement of | neon colours that work in every browser? Better have an animated | badge for each browser so that the people know, because the | people must know! | | Excellent find! | deaddodo wrote: | Yeah, and you don't get the real effect of them outside of | 800x600 or 1024x768. They _look_ small here, but were | relatively large on pages back then. | ziml77 wrote: | Weirdly the AdGuard Tracking Protection filter has a cosmetic | rule that is blocking the images. | | If I'm understanding the syntax correctly it seems to be this | one. ~underverse.su,~underver.se,~minu.stv.ee,~ | sota.com,~7kingdoms.ru,~epicl2.com,~forum.ixbt.com,~forum.themega | .ru,~gamepedia.com,~makeserver.ru,~mozhor.ru,~onliner.by,~wiktion | ary.org,~yandex.by,~yandex.com,~yandex.com.tr,~yandex.ru,~yandex. | ua##img[width="88"][height="31"] | | The comment says the intent is to hide hit counters. | rvz wrote: | Another collection waiting to be sold as an NFT soon. | junon wrote: | This takes me back to the days of forum signatures, | planetrenders.com, pixel fonts with 1px strokes, making emoticons | ( _not_ emojis) on deviantArt, BBCode and making long-winded | posts on VBulletin /PhpBB boards with the top three posts | "reserved for later use". | | Man I wish I could go back. | pineconewarrior wrote: | Yes! This is how I got my start in design. So many Photoshop | tutorials that started with Render Clouds. Haha! | faeyanpiraat wrote: | And then you had like ps 3 and the effect in the next step | required version 4 or something | MrLeap wrote: | clouds -> difference clouds a few times -> invert -> ctrl+L | and compress = lightning is still a recipe in my muscle | memory. | systemvoltage wrote: | I used to "hand-craft" HTML. Literally, writing it and no | templates so each page is unique. Gallery page was manually | updated. | | If I kinda deeply think about it - I post may be one post every | 2 months. Why the hell do I need a blogging CMS or static site | generator, etc? Just craft a HTML page. You can just write it | by hand. #header_h1 ...is it that much more work to write | <h1>header_h1</h1>? Especially, every once in 2 months!? Each | blog post would be custom. And AWESOME and set in stone. "What | if I need to update the header on every single page?" Just | don't. No need to update the theme ever. It's like writing a | hand written letter, once you put the ink down, it's done. Mail | it. | aparks517 wrote: | I've been doing this for a while and it's great. If you know | a few tricks (optional closing tags, for example), writing | HTML by hand can actually be rather pleasant. Go for it! | systemvoltage wrote: | I used to copy html from the previous page and then modify | as necessary. | | Overtime it evolved and got cooler! But, there was no need | to go back and update old posts. | | I think charm about this is severely underrated as seen by | the downvotes. | unicornporn wrote: | Some people still do this. http://john.ankarstrom.se/html/ | bluedino wrote: | "Under Construction" images, rotating skull and fire GIFs... | sp332 wrote: | http://www.textfiles.com/underconstruction/ | ceautery wrote: | Flaming logo... spinning logo... | roland35 wrote: | Can't forget albino black sheep and homestar runner! | unicornporn wrote: | Deviantart? Seems you're in the wrong millennium? Deviantart | started in 2000 and at that time I fondly remember us making | fun of 90s web design by creating mock sites with 88x31 | graphics. In -97 I remember it being all the rage though. :) | Three, four or five years may not sound like a lot of time, but | the web was changing at a pretty rapid pace back then. | username91 wrote: | 88x31s were still alive and well on early deviantART: | https://www.deviantart.com/fractalmbrown/art/Baby- | deviantART... | klaussilveira wrote: | > pixel fonts with 1px strokes | | Nostalgia kicked in hard. | aba_cz wrote: | You know what's interesting? You are not alone. Something Awful | forums still have most of these things and people are even | paying for that in the year 2021 :D | grishka wrote: | Userbars! | _def wrote: | I completely forgot about them! Just looked at a bunch of | them, they (and forum signatures in general) were kind of | awesome. | simook wrote: | I too miss those days. | | What's stopping us? | sbarre wrote: | We're all older and we need reading glasses now? ;-) | pak wrote: | You'd probably enjoy this collage of GeoCities vibes: | | https://www.cameronsworld.net/ | squiggleblaz wrote: | Unlike Geocities, that site is a masterful work of design! | (And the wayback machine links are broken today due to a | planned power outage.) | cmg wrote: | Fair warning: Page 1 transfers about 8.3MB with 1,000+ HTTP | requests. And will likely bring back memories of the 90s. | theandrewbailey wrote: | This site would benefit greatly from HTTP 2.0, but it's kinda | cool to see each banner load one after another. | qwertox wrote: | Some do fail to load for me, yet they then do load when I | right click them to open them in a new tab. | pjc50 wrote: | The authentic 28.8k modem experience. | derefr wrote: | Or even more, data: URIs. | coldacid wrote: | Yeah, the speed at which it loaded definitely brought back that | 90s feeling. | GloriousKoji wrote: | So... on par with any modern website (minus the 90s)? | cmg wrote: | As theandrewbailey said, it would absolutely benefit from | HTTP/2 - it took about 30 seconds to complete on my fast | cable connection on a laptop. | sverhagen wrote: | I saw the slow loading of the page, and it made me confident | that Hacker News will take it down soon enough. | rasz wrote: | Loads as fast as modern YouTube. | NelsonMinar wrote: | Imagine loading this page in the 90s though! One new HTTP | connection at a time, a full TCP handshake. Maybe if you were | lucky you were using Netscape which would load up to 4 | resources at once! | chrisco255 wrote: | 8MB would take all night on my 2400 baud modem. | cyberge99 wrote: | We were hacking back then too. | | pipelining:true | | (Not really a hack, but a lesser known optimization) | fhw8234 wrote: | Nice | nixass wrote: | Flashback to dial up era. Love it. | godot wrote: | Oh man, seeing "88x31" really takes me back. Internet Explorer | and Netscape buttons were all the rage to put on your web site. I | remember making some 88x31 buttons/logos myself too. I know it's | nostalgia talking but it truly was the good old days of the web | to me. | allenu wrote: | I was surprised to not find any X10 ads in there, but I guess | they just never did small GIFs. Some of their examples from back | in the day http://pages.cs.wisc.edu/~kuan/x10.html | TedDoesntTalk wrote: | Interestingly all of those images seem to be for their camera | products. But long before those, X10 sold remote control | systems that switched devices on/off over in-home electrical | wiring (using the independent X10 protocol). The reliability of | these systems were pretty bad as I recall. They offered | something like 16 channels with various management devices that | allowed for complicated scheduling of device switching. | allenu wrote: | Heh, I remember those. I had my first internship around that | time and one of the made-up jobs my boss at the time had me | do was look into those switches. Another intern told me he | just wanted someone to look into it since he wanted to try | using them on his own home. :) | anonymousiam wrote: | X10 was the first real home automation standard. The protocol | was subject to interference and poor propagation, and did not | use any EDAC or acknowledgement so it was pretty unreliable. | It was still pretty useful for some things, and X10 devices | are still being sold. | pjc50 wrote: | The technology may have been fine. The advertising was | insanely ubiquitous, in a way rarely seen since. Maybe | Evony? | twic wrote: | Those ads were annoying enough that Kompressor wrote a song | about them: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wF8NK6eruUs ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2021-06-15 23:00 UTC)