Was the Stack Exchange “Happy April Fools” page fitting with the 90s code? The Next CEO of...

logical reads on global temp table, but not on session-level temp table

Strange use of "whether ... than ..." in official text

Can you teleport closer to a creature you are Frightened of?

Calculating discount not working

Gauss' Posthumous Publications?

Ising model simulation

Creating a script with console commands

Early programmable calculators with RS-232

What happens if you break a law in another country outside of that country?

Is it reasonable to ask other researchers to send me their previous grant applications?

"Eavesdropping" vs "Listen in on"

Is a distribution that is normal, but highly skewed, considered Gaussian?

How exploitable/balanced is this homebrew spell: Spell Permanency?

What is the difference between 'contrib' and 'non-free' packages repositories?

Identify and count spells (Distinctive events within each group)

Is the 21st century's idea of "freedom of speech" based on precedent?

How can I separate the number from the unit in argument?

What is a typical Mizrachi Seder like?

Incomplete cube

Calculate the Mean mean of two numbers

My ex-girlfriend uses my Apple ID to login to her iPad, do I have to give her my Apple ID password to reset it?

Is it possible to create a QR code using text?

Why did early computer designers eschew integers?

How does a dynamic QR code work?



Was the Stack Exchange “Happy April Fools” page fitting with the 90s code?



The Next CEO of Stack OverflowWhen did the <input> tag come about, and in what web browser?what city was unix invented in?What computer was used in 1958 for handwriting recognition by Dimond?What was the first time the '@' at sign was used to address an user?Other possible inventors of the Transistor?Why was Apple not able to compete with Microsoft in the home PC market?What was the other 99% that PARC didn't show to Apple?What is the origin of the term “Developer” in the context of software?Given the direct involvement of tech companies has there been any strikes over tech companies’ participation in surveillance culture?Was Donald Knuth the first person to typeset a book using a computer?












3















After thinking about what page I could post this question on, I figured that this might be the most appropriate so apologies if it isn't...



So we nostalgia fans were all treated to a nineties-esque page on the various Stack Exchange sites, complete with guest books, obnoxious tiled backgrounds, Comic Sans, etc.



However, when I went to view the source code, I was expecting to see tables and frames and the other stuff web developers considered "advanced" at the time, but instead I saw the usual modern inclusion of CSS, java-script and all the rest. But then I got thinking, maybe it still might have worked to a degree, possibly in the late 1990s anyway, possibly some of the more advanced web developers had moved beyond the old tables and frames.



So my question is, could this page have worked on a browser from the 90s assuming a monitor with a good enough resolution, computer with enough memory, etc? And if not, would it have been possible to create this page using whatever HTML code, etc. was available at the time? And if so, would it still work now considering a lot of features may have been deprecated / changed?










share|improve this question



























    3















    After thinking about what page I could post this question on, I figured that this might be the most appropriate so apologies if it isn't...



    So we nostalgia fans were all treated to a nineties-esque page on the various Stack Exchange sites, complete with guest books, obnoxious tiled backgrounds, Comic Sans, etc.



    However, when I went to view the source code, I was expecting to see tables and frames and the other stuff web developers considered "advanced" at the time, but instead I saw the usual modern inclusion of CSS, java-script and all the rest. But then I got thinking, maybe it still might have worked to a degree, possibly in the late 1990s anyway, possibly some of the more advanced web developers had moved beyond the old tables and frames.



    So my question is, could this page have worked on a browser from the 90s assuming a monitor with a good enough resolution, computer with enough memory, etc? And if not, would it have been possible to create this page using whatever HTML code, etc. was available at the time? And if so, would it still work now considering a lot of features may have been deprecated / changed?










    share|improve this question

























      3












      3








      3








      After thinking about what page I could post this question on, I figured that this might be the most appropriate so apologies if it isn't...



      So we nostalgia fans were all treated to a nineties-esque page on the various Stack Exchange sites, complete with guest books, obnoxious tiled backgrounds, Comic Sans, etc.



      However, when I went to view the source code, I was expecting to see tables and frames and the other stuff web developers considered "advanced" at the time, but instead I saw the usual modern inclusion of CSS, java-script and all the rest. But then I got thinking, maybe it still might have worked to a degree, possibly in the late 1990s anyway, possibly some of the more advanced web developers had moved beyond the old tables and frames.



      So my question is, could this page have worked on a browser from the 90s assuming a monitor with a good enough resolution, computer with enough memory, etc? And if not, would it have been possible to create this page using whatever HTML code, etc. was available at the time? And if so, would it still work now considering a lot of features may have been deprecated / changed?










      share|improve this question














      After thinking about what page I could post this question on, I figured that this might be the most appropriate so apologies if it isn't...



      So we nostalgia fans were all treated to a nineties-esque page on the various Stack Exchange sites, complete with guest books, obnoxious tiled backgrounds, Comic Sans, etc.



      However, when I went to view the source code, I was expecting to see tables and frames and the other stuff web developers considered "advanced" at the time, but instead I saw the usual modern inclusion of CSS, java-script and all the rest. But then I got thinking, maybe it still might have worked to a degree, possibly in the late 1990s anyway, possibly some of the more advanced web developers had moved beyond the old tables and frames.



      So my question is, could this page have worked on a browser from the 90s assuming a monitor with a good enough resolution, computer with enough memory, etc? And if not, would it have been possible to create this page using whatever HTML code, etc. was available at the time? And if so, would it still work now considering a lot of features may have been deprecated / changed?







      computers






      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question











      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question










      asked 5 hours ago









      colmdecolmde

      394136




      394136






















          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          3














          No. The glitter falling off of the mouse was not possible in 90s era HTML.






          share|improve this answer
























          • Clarification: It was possible (and done, IIRC) to do that effect via other means (eg: Javascript), but probably not the exact HTML being used to do it here.

            – T.E.D.
            1 hour ago





















          1














          People have actually tried this. The answer is "No".



          In particular, you may notice, if you scroll all the way to the bottom, an old-timey "Best viewed in Netscape 3.0" bug. It does not in fact work at all under old installs of Netscape 3.0.



          As near as I can tell, the main hang-up seems to be SSL compatibility, but likely if that issue were solved there would be other HTML/Java/Javascript issues, as Mr. Burnap posits.



          Obviously most of us, unlike the poster in the linked question, aren't running on Win95 with old browsers. So rather than make it work using actual period web code designed for actual period web browsers that few could appreciate, they made it work on modern web browsers, but with a 1990's look-and-feel.



          As someone who was using web browsers since the NSCA Mosaic days, they did a pretty impressive job. My only big complaint is the mouse pointer fiddling they did didn't hose the pointer's responsiveness nearly enough. There's other little touches that could be added (eg: Blink Tag), but it really does look amazingly like the real deal.






          share|improve this answer


























            Your Answer








            StackExchange.ready(function() {
            var channelOptions = {
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "324"
            };
            initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
            // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
            if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
            createEditor();
            });
            }
            else {
            createEditor();
            }
            });

            function createEditor() {
            StackExchange.prepareEditor({
            heartbeatType: 'answer',
            autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
            convertImagesToLinks: false,
            noModals: true,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: null,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            imageUploader: {
            brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
            contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
            allowUrls: true
            },
            noCode: true, onDemand: true,
            discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
            ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
            });


            }
            });














            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fhistory.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f51908%2fwas-the-stack-exchange-happy-april-fools-page-fitting-with-the-90s-code%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            2 Answers
            2






            active

            oldest

            votes








            2 Answers
            2






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes









            3














            No. The glitter falling off of the mouse was not possible in 90s era HTML.






            share|improve this answer
























            • Clarification: It was possible (and done, IIRC) to do that effect via other means (eg: Javascript), but probably not the exact HTML being used to do it here.

              – T.E.D.
              1 hour ago


















            3














            No. The glitter falling off of the mouse was not possible in 90s era HTML.






            share|improve this answer
























            • Clarification: It was possible (and done, IIRC) to do that effect via other means (eg: Javascript), but probably not the exact HTML being used to do it here.

              – T.E.D.
              1 hour ago
















            3












            3








            3







            No. The glitter falling off of the mouse was not possible in 90s era HTML.






            share|improve this answer













            No. The glitter falling off of the mouse was not possible in 90s era HTML.







            share|improve this answer












            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer










            answered 5 hours ago









            Steven BurnapSteven Burnap

            4,0551927




            4,0551927













            • Clarification: It was possible (and done, IIRC) to do that effect via other means (eg: Javascript), but probably not the exact HTML being used to do it here.

              – T.E.D.
              1 hour ago





















            • Clarification: It was possible (and done, IIRC) to do that effect via other means (eg: Javascript), but probably not the exact HTML being used to do it here.

              – T.E.D.
              1 hour ago



















            Clarification: It was possible (and done, IIRC) to do that effect via other means (eg: Javascript), but probably not the exact HTML being used to do it here.

            – T.E.D.
            1 hour ago







            Clarification: It was possible (and done, IIRC) to do that effect via other means (eg: Javascript), but probably not the exact HTML being used to do it here.

            – T.E.D.
            1 hour ago













            1














            People have actually tried this. The answer is "No".



            In particular, you may notice, if you scroll all the way to the bottom, an old-timey "Best viewed in Netscape 3.0" bug. It does not in fact work at all under old installs of Netscape 3.0.



            As near as I can tell, the main hang-up seems to be SSL compatibility, but likely if that issue were solved there would be other HTML/Java/Javascript issues, as Mr. Burnap posits.



            Obviously most of us, unlike the poster in the linked question, aren't running on Win95 with old browsers. So rather than make it work using actual period web code designed for actual period web browsers that few could appreciate, they made it work on modern web browsers, but with a 1990's look-and-feel.



            As someone who was using web browsers since the NSCA Mosaic days, they did a pretty impressive job. My only big complaint is the mouse pointer fiddling they did didn't hose the pointer's responsiveness nearly enough. There's other little touches that could be added (eg: Blink Tag), but it really does look amazingly like the real deal.






            share|improve this answer






























              1














              People have actually tried this. The answer is "No".



              In particular, you may notice, if you scroll all the way to the bottom, an old-timey "Best viewed in Netscape 3.0" bug. It does not in fact work at all under old installs of Netscape 3.0.



              As near as I can tell, the main hang-up seems to be SSL compatibility, but likely if that issue were solved there would be other HTML/Java/Javascript issues, as Mr. Burnap posits.



              Obviously most of us, unlike the poster in the linked question, aren't running on Win95 with old browsers. So rather than make it work using actual period web code designed for actual period web browsers that few could appreciate, they made it work on modern web browsers, but with a 1990's look-and-feel.



              As someone who was using web browsers since the NSCA Mosaic days, they did a pretty impressive job. My only big complaint is the mouse pointer fiddling they did didn't hose the pointer's responsiveness nearly enough. There's other little touches that could be added (eg: Blink Tag), but it really does look amazingly like the real deal.






              share|improve this answer




























                1












                1








                1







                People have actually tried this. The answer is "No".



                In particular, you may notice, if you scroll all the way to the bottom, an old-timey "Best viewed in Netscape 3.0" bug. It does not in fact work at all under old installs of Netscape 3.0.



                As near as I can tell, the main hang-up seems to be SSL compatibility, but likely if that issue were solved there would be other HTML/Java/Javascript issues, as Mr. Burnap posits.



                Obviously most of us, unlike the poster in the linked question, aren't running on Win95 with old browsers. So rather than make it work using actual period web code designed for actual period web browsers that few could appreciate, they made it work on modern web browsers, but with a 1990's look-and-feel.



                As someone who was using web browsers since the NSCA Mosaic days, they did a pretty impressive job. My only big complaint is the mouse pointer fiddling they did didn't hose the pointer's responsiveness nearly enough. There's other little touches that could be added (eg: Blink Tag), but it really does look amazingly like the real deal.






                share|improve this answer















                People have actually tried this. The answer is "No".



                In particular, you may notice, if you scroll all the way to the bottom, an old-timey "Best viewed in Netscape 3.0" bug. It does not in fact work at all under old installs of Netscape 3.0.



                As near as I can tell, the main hang-up seems to be SSL compatibility, but likely if that issue were solved there would be other HTML/Java/Javascript issues, as Mr. Burnap posits.



                Obviously most of us, unlike the poster in the linked question, aren't running on Win95 with old browsers. So rather than make it work using actual period web code designed for actual period web browsers that few could appreciate, they made it work on modern web browsers, but with a 1990's look-and-feel.



                As someone who was using web browsers since the NSCA Mosaic days, they did a pretty impressive job. My only big complaint is the mouse pointer fiddling they did didn't hose the pointer's responsiveness nearly enough. There's other little touches that could be added (eg: Blink Tag), but it really does look amazingly like the real deal.







                share|improve this answer














                share|improve this answer



                share|improve this answer








                edited 1 hour ago

























                answered 1 hour ago









                T.E.D.T.E.D.

                77.3k11172315




                77.3k11172315






























                    draft saved

                    draft discarded




















































                    Thanks for contributing an answer to History Stack Exchange!


                    • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                    But avoid



                    • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                    • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                    To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function () {
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fhistory.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f51908%2fwas-the-stack-exchange-happy-april-fools-page-fitting-with-the-90s-code%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                    }
                    );

                    Post as a guest















                    Required, but never shown





















































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown

































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown







                    Popular posts from this blog

                    Anexo:Material bélico de la Fuerza Aérea de Chile Índice Aeronaves Defensa...

                    Always On Availability groups resolving state after failover - Remote harden of transaction...

                    update json value to null Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara ...