• Hexorg@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    1 year ago

    Funny you mention the resolution because in the 90s we had 640x480 which was way smaller than what cell phones have now and we still managed to have very functional web. Yeah the fonts weren’t as pretty and pictured had jagged edges but it worked and it was great!

    • sailsperson@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      Exactly! Screens are so big now, they should pack so much real estate, but they just don’t most of the time, and it’s not even because of human eyesight limitations.

      • jmp242@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t understand how or why modern interfaces have less information density than in 1997 on 640x480.

        Or why they are less customizable.

        Someone said the use just the middle of the screen display is based on some studies of what people can actually read or take in, but I don’t think I agree (hacker news isn’t as limited and it works for me). But why not have 60 percent of our physical screens display off white blank space. /s

    • Pisck@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      We waited for our images to load one line at a time and we were grateful, dammit!