Author Archives: olia

A very interesting thread on Reddit.
Geocities is mentioned quite often. some times seriously, some times as a joke.
I liked the comment “You think you’re being funny, but Geocities probably should be on that list.”
Some mention Altavista. Napster and other dead services, others mention what is hot right now and do really believe, that “internet is only 8 years old.”
I could read this discussion forever. Still this is my favorite reaction:“I somehow read this as the “Stevie Wonders” of the internet.”

The web is almost 20 years old now. Throughout these years, it has transformed from a new medium to new media in the best very sense of the word – it continues to evolve. Its “stupidity”, its neutrality, which lies at the core of internet architecture, allows it to continue to grow but without ever really growing old or mature.

Dealing with an eternally young medium means that we always have to deal with something new – technically as well as ideologically and aesthetically. It means that the dying of web pages, users or services is seen as a natural process. And it makes no sense to speak of a project reaching middle age, because age has no value here. Getting old is something that you don’t do on the net.

The Geocities archive provides us with the experience of getting old. Coming into contact with aged pages is an important lesson that defies the impression that on the net, everything always happens in the present.

Ruins and Templates of Geocities is the first chapter of the publication Still There. It is based on this blog’s posts tagged with “ruins”, “templates” and “alive”.

We made a new work about the web of the 90s — Once Upon. Thanks to top bloggers and twitterers it was reblogged, retweeted and got quite some attention and positive response.

But we can’t ignore that links to “Once Upon” mostly were tagged with humor, web humor, geek humor and the like. Which by itself is ok. After all we are not deadly serious and laugh about architecture and appearance of today’s social networks and smile at our own obsession to design with framesets and tables.

What really troubles us is the idea that we wanted to make fun about WWW of the last century, and that we wanted to show how ugly Facebook etc could look, or how ugly the web looked then. Even the most loyal commentors, even the most nostalgic ones, notice that we make the services “look ugly”1. Though we didn’t. Neither intentionally nor of ignorance.

We actually find our designs beautiful (as well as design of many Geocities pages we analyze in the blog) but here everybody is free to disagree. We really insist that our Once Upon designs are browser specific: They are modular — you see the borders in between data of different formats like pictures, text, and markup itself; and they don’t hide markup — you see borders of tables, borders of frames, scrollbars, default colors of links and background. In a slightly exaggerated manner they show the web’s native aesthetics.

And, sadly, this browser specificity is exactly what is considered to be “ugly”.

Remember the famous text by Dutch typo gurus, founders of Emigre magazine Zuzana Licko and Rudy VanderLans Ambition/Fear? In 1989 they reassured fellow designers:

There is nothing intrinsically “computer-like” about digitally generated images. Low-end devices such as the Macintosh do not yield a stronger inherent style than do the high-end Scitex systems, which are often perceived as functioning invisibly and seamlessly. This merely shows what computer virgins we are. High-end computers have been painstakingly programmed to mimic traditional techniques such as airbrushing or calligraphy, whereas the low-end machines force us to deal with more original, sometimes alien, manifestations. Coarse bitmaps are no more visibly obtrusive than the texture of oil paint on a canvas, but our unfamiliarity with bitmaps causes us to confuse the medium with the message. Creating a graphic language with today’s tools will mean forgetting the styles of archaic technologies and remembering the very basic of design principles.

Believe in “the basic design principles” and desire to overcome limitations of young technologies are mainstream. Professional screen design is all about forgetting. Forgetting and ignoring the browser, the interface, pixels, …

We should do something about it in 2012.

Happy New Year

olia


  1. See for example ubergizmo’s blog post. []


Jason Scott answers Dragan’s question about GeoCities profiles that have apparently survived during VERBINDINGEN/JONCTIONS 13 2011-12-04.

In his opinion these happened to people who payed for Yahoo! Web Hosting, an option suggested to GeoCities users when Yahoo! announced its end. And because of a technical glitch, not only the newly bought domain names lead to the old content, but also the classic GeoCities URLs.

We just looked at Yahoo!’s help and found something else, a supposed premium GeoCities account called GeoCities Plus that promised unupdatable eternity, WWW’s hell :

If you’re a Yahoo! GeoCities Plus customer, your friends and family can still view your web site as usual. However, you can no longer access your files or update your pages with GeoCities tools. To update your site, you’ll need to upgrade to Web Hosting.

You won’t believe, but several hours ago, while surfing and looking for something unrelated to Geocities, we found a Geocities page that still exists! on Geocities!
Not a folder with templates by Yahoo. Not an invisible GIF.

But a real profile of a real user!

Namely famous ASCII artist Joan G. Stark.
http://www.geocities.com/spunk1111/
Last updated in 2001.

We rubbed our eyes, reloaded and Shift-reloaded, but the miracle didn’t disappear. The page is still there. And that’s not all, further research showed that Spunk’s previous account /7373 in SoHo neighborhood is also online. http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/7373/
Last updated in 2001 as well.

Both profiles are almost identical. And there is the 3rd one — http://www.ascii-art.com/.

But it is only an index page –not updated since 2001 and squatted by porn spam — if you click enter you are back at Geocities/SoHo/7373/

What’s going on? How did it happen? Was it forgotten? Protected? Paid? Are there other survivors?

Update: the question about other survivors is answered in comments by Nick and Google http://www.google.ca/search?q=site%3Ageocities.com.
What are all these profiles doing there?

I don’t know how to begin writing about web pages made “In loving memory of -“. They’re too personal and emotionally loaded for a formal analysis. No, writing is already the next issue, I don’t even collect and categorize them, nor do I bookmark or tag them. I don’t take screenshots and can’t even “save the image as”. Which is a trouble because these images and layouts are very strong. Often unique, probably because I’m not the only user who stopped herself from appropriating parts of these tributes.

Pages of web masters in grief are loaded with the belief that through “the network of the networks” you can establish a connection with those who are no longer among us: through links, buttons, forms, applets … These pages are medium specific in the ultimate way — being a system (infrastructure) for communicating with lost ones.

A quote from Scott’s talk at the Personal Digital Archiving conference earlier this year:

“This is a site created by a mother to commemorate her lost son, who died
as an infant. What struck me, if you look at the dates, is that he died
in 1983, a full 15 years before Geocities came along, and her feelings
were still strong in two ways – she wanted to keep his memory alive, and
she saw Geocities as the way to do it.”

“Graphic, Animation, and background by Ivelisse Hernández © 1997 & 1998”

Original URL: http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Cafe/2625/

The Wizard is still there, but you can’t build anything with it. I’m still guessing why Yahoo! keeps a lot of Geocities supplementary stuff online.


Olia and Dragan reading chapter “Adding Multimedia to your GeoCities Site” (p 213)


We ordered the book, after finding this review:


Original URL: http://www.geocities.com/PicketFence/1284/oldindex.htm

The EXTERNAL LINK led to Amazon where it is still possible to buy “Creating GeoCities Websites”, and much much cheaper than 12 years ago. $0.10 against $39.99 in 1999. But I wouldn’t recommend to do it. Even in 1999 readers left very skeptical feedback.

May 14, 1999:

“This is absoluately a laugher, an entire book on how to design a website for ONE specific free webpage server, and unfortunately, a heavily contraversial one with their excess amount of involuntary advertising of themselves using pop-up ads […]”

May 20, 1999:

“This book is a terrible resource on designing web pages. I suppose if you wanted your site to look like every other pitiful GeoCities site out there, then you could find a use for this book.”

And last but really last, I don’t think there will be any more. September 28, 2005:

“the book was printed in 1999, so all of the information i needed about geocities was way outdated. product sucked”

The following is an addition to the Personal Page Blue findings.

Shown are the Blues of the last two decades, as seen on pages and profiles of web users.

1995

1997

1999

2006

2010