Slashdot Mirror


Jurassic Web

theodp writes "It wasn't so long ago, but Slate's Farhad Manjoo notes that The Internet of 1996 is almost unrecognizable compared with what we have today. No YouTube, Digg, Huffington Post, Gawker, Google, Twitter, Facebook, or Wikipedia. In 1996, Americans with Internet access spent fewer than 30 minutes a month surfing the Web and were paying for the Internet by the hour. Today, Nielsen says we spend about 27 hours a month online (present company excepted, of course!)." I thought in 1996 all we did was idle in IRC channels while we wrote code in other terminals.

73 of 430 comments (clear)

  1. "Wasn't So Long Ago?!" by eldavojohn · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It wasn't so long ago ...

    It was 13 years ago. Maybe I'm just young but that is an eternity in the world of computer technology.

    I would argue that you should really be looking at the hardware & communication infrastructure because internet usage (in my opinion) is really a product of how cheap the hardware makes the connection and usage.

    --
    My work here is dung.
    1. Re:"Wasn't So Long Ago?!" by mcgrew · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It was 13 years ago. Maybe I'm just young

      See my sig, kid.

      But you're right, I didn't get on the internet until a year later. It only cost me $12.95 per month, with "unlimited access" which really was unlimited. It even included an unlimited amount of personal web space that I abused horribly, trying to find the limit to my unlimited access and never could. I think all the game demos, patches, etc I posted was part of what made my Quake site so popular; once I got them uploaded to my ISP's server (which took quite a while to download, then to upload) others could download them from my site FAST.

      I wasn't paying by the hour as TFS says; I had paid Compuserve by the hour ten or so years earlier, but I never was on AOL. I did appreciate all the free floppies they mailed me, though.

      I would argue that you should really be looking at the hardware & communication infrastructure because internet usage (in my opinion) is really a product of how cheap the hardware makes the connection and usage.

      The infrastructure was mostly the phone line and modems. They really weren't that expensive, and neither were computers so long as you built your own.

    2. Re:"Wasn't So Long Ago?!" by mog007 · · Score: 2, Informative

      I have issue with the summary. Back in 96 I was paying a flat rate for internet access, and I spent quite a few hours fiddling around with it. Granted, about 90% of my time online involved MUDs.

    3. Re:"Wasn't So Long Ago?!" by MetaPhyzx · · Score: 2, Informative

      I was paying for 100 hours a month, then unlimited by 1995 as well (but my "innanet" usage began in university in full earnest addiction circa 1993). Gopher, IRC and USENET. I think I spent more time 'hanging out' on IRC and in newsgroups than I do on the Web these days.

      --
      Blacker than my baby girl's stare. Black like the veil that the muslimina wear. Black like the planet that they fear...
    4. Re:"Wasn't So Long Ago?!" by bonch · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I was a freshman in high school, and the Internet wasn't as unrecognizable as the story summary implies. People played graphics-focused first person shooters online, used annoying chat acronyms like "lol," and flamed each other on message boards about stupid shit. I got home dialup access in 1997, and it was unlimited access with a flat fee. There were already banner ads, annoying Flash sites, and commercialization. I believe Drudge Report was even around then, with almost the exact same visual design that it has now. Linux nerds ranted about Micro$oft. People played StarCraft on Battle.net. There wasn't a Google, but there was Yahoo and Infoseek. People traded MP3s to play in Winamp. Sometime in 1996 or 1997, I was searching for something about Gameboys and found a page about Gameboy development and discovered emulators for the first time--even that scene already existed.

      When I really think back on it, it doesn't feel drastically different from today other than more people using it and some obvious improvements in presentation. There's no major paradigm difference other than maybe portable devices, but PDAs already existed then, as did laptops. Companies want you to think everything is new, though.

      If anything, culture itself kind of flatlined and became an amalgamated mass of tired memes and pop trends. It doesn't even feel like music or clothing has changed much in a decade.

  2. IMDB was up by LotsOfPhil · · Score: 3, Informative

    The first (non obvious) big site that pops to mind is IMDB. Other than that I just remember IRC and BBSes.

    --
    This post climbed Mt. Washington.
    1. Re:IMDB was up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Sadly, GeoCities existed then, and even scarier is: it still does.

    2. Re:IMDB was up by ivan256 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Most of the current stuff is either refined, or regressed versions of what we had back then.

      Digg => Slashdot
      Huffington Post => There wasn't any shortage of bullshit artists back then either
      Google => Yahoo, AltaVista, etc..
      Twitter => IRC > Twitter. Twitter is like IRC, except there's only one channel, and everybody's on ignore by default.
      Wikipedia => Everything (up to the reader whether this was progress or regression)
      And there's the things that social networks and tag clouds replaced..... AOL, Web Rings, Geocities, etc...

      What should be more shocking is that in 12 years, there isn't actually all that much out there that is truely new.

    3. Re:IMDB was up by cbiltcliffe · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What should be more shocking is that in 12 years, there isn't actually all that much out there that is truely new.

      Probably the closest thing to "new" is P2P filesharing. And major companies want to crush it.
      So there's your proof. Corporations really do inhibit progress.

      (Yes, I realize P2P networks existed well before Napster came along, but not in the same sense.)

      --
      "City hall" in German is "Rathaus" Kinda explains a few things......
    4. Re:IMDB was up by TheRaven64 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Wikipedia => Everything (up to the reader whether this was progress or regression)

      Wikipedia has roots right back in the first versions of WorldWideWeb. TBL's idea was that every web browser would be a web server as well. Every user would serve a few pages and browse a lot. His design also incorporated editing directly into the browser, so you could edit any page you had permissions for.

      This didn't really catch on, because a lot of users were on dial-up connections which were too slow for serving and were only online for a small amount of time per month and so could not be used for anything that people might access at any time. Now, the average broadband connection is fast enough for lightweight web serving and is always on. Run a small server in the router and set the headers so ISPs can aggressively cache your content, and you've got a proper, distributed, Wikipedia.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    5. Re:IMDB was up by ivan256 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Nah, we were trading files back then too. The only thing that's changed is the protocols.

    6. Re:IMDB was up by RMH101 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Remember Angelfire?

    7. Re:IMDB was up by neomunk · · Score: 3, Informative

      I met my wife back in '96 on a telnet BBS. shadow.scc(or acc).iit.edu to be specific.

      I was getting internet access back then via a hole in the library dial-up information access system. Mostly used for gopher access, some links to other libraries would allow you to escape out to a telnet prompt. From there it was just a matter of knowing where to telnet. BBSs came first, then after I learned the magic of a shell, it wasn't long until I figured out how to implement PPP. By summer '95 I had slackware installed and (thanks to a friend of mine) access at an early-adopter local dial-up ISP. Even though the whole web was "mine" at that point, I retained a special love for shadow, and ended up meeting my wifey there...

      Ahh, nostalgia.

    8. Re:IMDB was up by Carewolf · · Score: 2, Insightful

      alt.binaries on usenet, open FTP servers, DDC channels on IRC

      While not P2P technology, the servers was not sued by RIAA or confiscated by the police. So P2P would have been a solution to a not yet existing problem.

    9. Re:IMDB was up by Hijacked+Public · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Scarier still: Yahoo still exists.

      I remember fondly the first time I loaded Google's search page. No ads, no weather report, no links to personal ads. Just a search box, as Al Gore himself intended it.

      I swore off garbage portal sites right then and I've never looked back.

      --
      "Sacrifice for the good of The State" - The State
    10. Re:IMDB was up by uncle+slacky · · Score: 2

      I first used the Internet in 1988, and well remember the Postnews warnings about "costing hundreds if not thousands of dollars" every time I posted to Usenet.

      --
      Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it.
    11. Re:IMDB was up by ivan256 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If your UID has less than 5 digits, it just means you weren't sufficiently paranoid about what Taco was going to do with your personal information. :)

  3. Ah, the era of homepages by Nursie · · Score: 5, Informative

    With terrible blinking text and eyesore backgrounds.

    They were all on geocities then. Now they're all on facebook/myspace.

    It was a nicer, gentler internet. Less advertising, less malware. Less crap and less people too... e-Commerce was a rarity. Naive users and online shops would transact via card-detail containing emails.

    There was still all the porn you could imagine though.

    1. Re:Ah, the era of homepages by sakdoctor · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Is myspace fundamentally different to the homepage?

      They are still gaudy shrines to the ego, constructed of copy-pasted crappy code.

    2. Re:Ah, the era of homepages by Xest · · Score: 4, Funny

      "There was still all the porn you could imagine though."

      There was also all the porn I couldn't imagine too.

    3. RE: Ah, the era of homepages by sean_nestor · · Score: 2, Interesting
      With terrible blinking text and eyesore backgrounds. They were all on geocities then. Now they're all on facebook/myspace.

      If you ask me, the facebooks/myspaces of today are way worse aesthetically. The worst you had to fear in those days was an embedded MIDI; now I've got high-quality MP3s streaming themselves without asking and fucking up the music I'm already listening to.

      Also, maybe they just didn't have the technology or bandwidth to piss away, but people didn't leave high-res 1562x968 pictures in comments sections (whose parallel I guess would be a "guest book", in 90's web terms).

      I'll take blinking text, frames, and animated GIFs over that any day. (I know, I know...get off my lawn!)

    4. Re:Ah, the era of homepages by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 3, Informative

      Funny how porn was one of the first major uses of the 'net.

      Not really. Porn is often one of the first major uses of a new media. Videotape built its success on porn.

    5. Re:Ah, the era of homepages by Hal_Porter · · Score: 4, Funny

      They were all on geocities then. Now they're all on facebook/myspace.

      Yep. Those awful 90's Geocitites user-generated content pages get my vote for worst use of disk space EVAH. Here's my resume (identical to every 90's college student CIS rez) here's my girlfriend (identical to every 90's college student g/f pics), here' my Honda Civic (ditto), here's pics of my g/f's cats.

      =Smidge=

      They were literally the same pictures. For disk space reasons they only had a few pictures of girlfriends/cat/civics and they just generate a page by picking one of each at random. Most people had so little individuality that they didn't notice.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    6. Re:Ah, the era of homepages by MindlessAutomata · · Score: 4, Funny

      THIS PAGE UNDER CONSTRUCTION

    7. Re:Ah, the era of homepages by Daimanta · · Score: 2, Interesting

      No, that's a myth. There are no serious sources that indicate that.

      --
      Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power lost.
    8. Re: Ah, the era of homepages by PitaBred · · Score: 2

      Headphones?

  4. 1996 nothing... by FlyingSquidStudios · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I remember seeing Mosaic in 1992 or 1993 and saying, "this will never replace Gopher."

    1. Re:1996 nothing... by WillAdams · · Score: 5, Funny

      Spyglass corporation's Mosaic was licensed by a company called Microsoft as the basis for a browser which they named Internet Explorer --- Spyglass had an absolutely fantastic deal where they got royalties on _every sale_ of the browser.

      William

      --
      Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
    2. Re:1996 nothing... by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 2, Funny

      A commenter from 1992 reviewing the WWW on Usenet: "Too slow, not as much information as Gopher, lame."

    3. Re:1996 nothing... by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 5, Interesting

      You remember the MIT coffee pot cam? Some joker who worked upstairs put a digital camera next to the coffee pot so he could point his browser at the link and see if there was any coffee made, without having to get his ass up and walk to the pot.

      Now that was entertainment. I knew people who didn't even go to MIT who checked that thing ALL THE TIME.

      --
      ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
    4. Re:1996 nothing... by hattig · · Score: 2, Informative

      That was at Cambridge University, in a room full of hackers and shelves full of empty champagne bottles. Oddly the camera didn't point at these, just the coffee pot which was mounted inside a ghetto metal rack.

    5. Re:1996 nothing... by kju · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The coffee machine still exists! After it broke in 2001, it was bought by german magazine "Der Spiegel". They got the machine fixed by the vendor and created a new webcam. See here: http://www.spiegel.de/static/popup/coffeecam/cam2.html

  5. IRC channels? by Anita+Coney · · Score: 3, Funny

    "I thought in 1996 all we did was idle in IRC channels while we wrote code in other terminals."

    Yet another person who does not know he can find porn on the net.

    --
    If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
    1. Re:IRC channels? by epiphani · · Score: 5, Interesting

      "I thought in 1996 all we did was idle in IRC channels while we wrote code in other terminals."

      Yet another person who does not know he can find porn on the net.

      Yet another person who is apparently unfamiliar with DCC. Why do you think we idled on IRC to begin with? It sure as hell wasn't for the intelligent conversation.

      --
      .
    2. Re:IRC channels? by e-scetic · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Actually, seems to me there was a time when conversation on IRC was somewhat intelligent. In the early days it was all academics, scientists, engineers, grads, etc. Then it was a yearly flood of university freshmen. As it grew, quality of conversation declined. Then there was the AOL invasion (1996?) where everyone and their developmentally delayed hormone challenged nephews suddenly had access to IRC. It's never been the same again.

      So the average mental and chronological age of the conversationalists became younger, gender representation became disproportionate, average education levels went from university level to high school, vocabulary levels went from college to kindergarten, etc.

      It's just that recent comers have no frame of reference for quality conversation on IRC, they've never seen it.

    3. Re:IRC channels? by bonch · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You and I must be remembering a different IRC. I remember chanwars and netsplits. In one channel I visited, there was a guy with a timed script that just said "heh." Over and over and over. Also, people constantly slapped each other with trouts thanks to mIRC.

      I actually think IRC is more intelligent now.

  6. Spam? by Jacek+Poplawski · · Score: 4, Insightful

    And what the hell is Huffington Post and Gawker to put it inside this list?

    1. Re:Spam? by biscuitlover · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Whether you agree with HuffPo's openly liberal politics or not, it's hard to deny that there was nothing like this kind of widespread online political commentary 10 years ago - certainly nothing that attracted the kind of traffic - or had the same kind of influence - that it now enjoys. Got to be a good thing - people need to be more interested in politics.

      As for Gawker... ummmmmm... errrrrr.... yep you're right.

    2. Re:Spam? by Silverhammer · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I could understand citing the political blogosphere as a whole, but to specifically mention the Huffington Post is just creepy. It's neither revolutionary nor reputable.

    3. Re:Spam? by bonch · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Aren't you forgetting Drudge Report? It came out in what, 1997? It also kind of broke a major news story about a certain president that Newsweek was planning to cover up.

      The mainstream media outlets STILL hate Matt Drudge for scooping it.

  7. When I think about the internet in 1996 by mandark1967 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I don't think about what was there, then, I think about what we have lost since then.

    So many sites that were popular in that timeframe are no longer around. Internet Archives doesn't capture all those funny, cool sites that used to be there and are, sadly, no longer around.

    --
    Sig Follows: "Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself." -- Mark Twain
    1. Re:When I think about the internet in 1996 by AKAImBatman · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What, like Hamster Dance? Shrines to music stars? MIDI background music that sounded awful on the hardware of the day? Streaming RealPlayer files so blurry you needed to be half-blind to make them out? Web Rings containing hundreds of links pointing to nothing at all? Personal homepages consisting of an export of Netscape bookmarks? Company web pages that were little more than brochures? (Often less than that!) Everyone on the interwebz thinking they're 1337 h4x0rz? (The 'z' was real popular back then.) XTrek competitions? MSN-only Startrek.com? Pages that would only render in Netscape or IE? (Complete with a "this page looks best in X" buttons.) Frames?!?

      The web was definitely a more innocent place back then, but it was in no way a more useful place. What you are remembering is the subculture that went with the web of the day. If you had Internet access... man, you had something special. This crazy ability to make friends from around the world, to meet people who like the same shows or games as you, the ability to load up your computer with all the shareware it could hold, to access amateur content like MODs, MIDIs, animations done in GIFs, fan fiction, web comics, and even Java Applet games!

      It was an exciting and fun time to be alive and I'm glad I was a part of it. But like all things, its time has passed and very little content of value was lost. In fact, most of the truly interesting content is still around. It simply doesn't shine very well in the face of what the modern Internet can do.

  8. My first web page 1998 by ZaSz-RH · · Score: 2, Funny

    Did it with Netscape Composer.
    Surprisingly, it still exists today... http://scudhavoc2.chez.com/
    (It's in french, but look at the layout and press ctrl-w )

  9. It wasn't so long ago by wiredog · · Score: 2, Insightful

    But kids who were not even in school then are driving now. People who were first graders then may well have voted in the last election.

    How many of us even had cell phones then?

    Even from a 43 year old's perspective, thirteen years can be a long time.

  10. Ugh by sean_nestor · · Score: 5, Funny
    It's 1996, and you're bored. What do you do? If you're one of the lucky people with an AOL account, you probably do the same thing you'd do in 2009: Go online. Crank up your modem, wait 20 seconds as you log in, and there you areâ""Welcome." You check your mail, then spend a few minutes chatting with your AOL buddies about which of you has the funniest screen name (you win, pimpodayear94).

    I can't believe I read this and immediately thought "...but AOL didn't allow screen names over 10 characters until 1999..."

    I'm a loser.

  11. I wrote a paper back in 1995 for the WWW conf. by olddotter · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It is interesting to look at that time. Cookies were not widely supported at that time. I can only find the paper here: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.54.7317 Times really have changed. Patrick

  12. In some ways it was much better in 1996 by owlnation · · Score: 4, Insightful

    No Google, true -- but choice of search engines. While Google was great between about '97 and '03 or so, it's become so gamed to be as bad as Altavista was in 1996 -- but now there's no real choice.

    No Facebook, no MySpace, no Wikipedia, less spam and far less Flash-based sites -- yes, those were better days. Not to mention a lot less Buzzwordery and fuckwittery.

    There was more porn, and it was more extreme and less restricted -- not so much video based, of course. And if you were a producer you could throw a site up and make money easily, now it's so hard as to be really not worthwhile.

    While there's definitely improvements, I can't help looking back fondly to a lot of things that are no longer with us. And the massive intrusion that some things on the web have become.

    1. Re:In some ways it was much better in 1996 by sean_nestor · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Not only that, but I remember seeing a lot of personal web sites that actually looked really good. They weren't in the majority by any shot, but the creators were usually young teens who bent over backwards working with (what would now be considered archaic) HTML code to make a highly aesthetically pleasing way to provide content. Sure, it was usually bad poetry or a fan-site about some alternative band...but they really were very engaging to browse through.

      These days, when most web sites are generating for you automatically or are taken from a pre-designed template, uniformity and rigidity are much more common. If you looked around back then, when there wasn't so much of a norm to adhere to, you'd regularly happen on a site that was, dare I say it, actually kind of artistic.

      I sometimes think it'd be nice if more people today looked as web sites as a form of art, and not just a way of delivering content. Having seen some of the sites I did then, it's hard not to think that the web as an art form is more than just a latent possibility.

  13. Web? by Chih · · Score: 3, Insightful

    In 96, I was still a teenager. All I did was play doorgames on BBSs. LoD, LORD, etc.. I suppose you could say I surfed the web, but it was really only for pron :D

    --
    For best results, avoid doing stupid things.
  14. Re:No Huffie Post!?! Oh My GOSH!!! by Farmer+Tim · · Score: 4, Funny

    Nerds were nerds long before the web. What is this "outside" of which you speak?

    --
    Blank until /. makes another boneheaded UI decision.
  15. Its not too late. by Bill,+Shooter+of+Bul · · Score: 3, Insightful

    With a little work we can get rid of Huffington Post, Digg,Twitter and Myspace. The rest can stay, but only if they behave themselves.

    --
    Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
  16. No Tub Girl?!?!?! by svendsen · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It was a sad time. There was no:

    TubGirl
    MeatSpin
    Two Girls on Cup

  17. Re:Paying for Internet by the hour? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Multiplayer Quake was too slow.

    It was okay for 2 players. QuakeWorld was released in 1996, however, and made things a lot better. 4-8 player games were quite playable over my modem in '96.

    IRC was getting flooded by clueless n00bs

    It still is. People with a clue have moved to SILC.

    Instant messaging == AIM. Without file transfers, voice, etc.

    In 1996? Really? AIM was released in 1997. Back in '96, ICQ was the only option for IM.

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  18. Yeah by sootman · · Score: 2, Insightful

    No Slashdot, no Facebook... all we did was work! ;-)

    I know some people complain about Google having been taken over by spammers, but it still works for me and what I search for. Anyone else remember doing every search twice--once at Yahoo! and getting too few matches, and then AltaVista and getting too many?

    --
    Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
  19. Re:No Huffie Post!?! Oh My GOSH!!! by Shakrai · · Score: 4, Funny

    What is this "outside" of which you speak?

    It's where you had to go when you were traveling to the dungeon masters house ;)

    --
    I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
    We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
  20. SpyGlass MS settlement by olddotter · · Score: 2, Informative

    SpyGlass sued MS and according to Wikipedia they settled for $8 Million.

    Internet Explorer 3.0 was released free of charge in August 1996 by bundling it with Windows 95, another OEM release. Microsoft thus made no direct revenues on IE and was liable to pay Spyglass only the minimum quarterly fee. In 1997, Spyglass threatened Microsoft with a contractual audit, in response to which Microsoft settled for US $8 million.[4]

    Wikipedia Article

    I seem to remember rumors that the settlement was for $50 Million, but perhaps that was what they were suing for, and settled for less.

  21. Re:No Huffie Post!?! Oh My GOSH!!! by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 5, Funny

    News flash: amateur astronomers are nerds, as are geologists and peleontologists. You can hardly do any of thet that without going outside.

    Uh, yes you can:
    astronomers: Bedroom window
    geologists and paleontologists: Hole in the basement floor

    --
    When information is power, privacy is freedom.
  22. Re:No Huffie Post!?! Oh My GOSH!!! by Ihmhi · · Score: 3, Funny

    You should see the mess that kid made in the basement with his research on geothermal energy!

    On the plus site, his parents unplugged the hot water heater and the water still stays at a toasty 2,000F.

  23. 1996? by Burnhard · · Score: 3, Insightful

    In 1996 I was spending a lot of my time out of lectures surfing The Hun's Yellow Pages. I was awarded first class honours, thus proving that porn makes you clever.

  24. Re:No Huffie Post!?! Oh My GOSH!!! by geminidomino · · Score: 3, Funny

    That's the place where the T-Rex ambushed you in the middle of an open plain whenever you were going in the opposite direction from what the DM wanted you to go.

  25. I spent more time online in 1996 than now. by keith · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Let's see if I can remember this correctly. In 1996 I was a Junior and then Senior in high-school. These were some of my activities...

    1) Heavy IRC usage.
    2) Designing webpages for my high-school.
    3) Writing versions of Minesweeper and Life as Java applets.
    4) Commenting on Robert Jordan novels in AOL message boards and usenet.
    5) Doing not-quite-legal activities that would have involved AOL not being happy with me if they found out. (think statute of limitations have passed)
    6) Playing Federation on AOL.
    7) Playing Bolo on school network, and wishing my home connection was fast enough to play at home.
    8) Downloading music and games from FirstClass or HotLine BBS systems (before I gained a piracy-conscience).
    9) I think I played a lot of World of Warcraft 2 online in the summer of 1996 while using Harvard's fast connection.
    10) Trying to figure out what the point of Gopher was, and eventually giving up.

    The main thing I remember is that while the Web and email were important, they were both a much smaller portion of my online usage than they are today. I think the turning point was 1997, where the web took over in terms of content.

    One amusing anecdote from 1996. I remember overhearing two people who couldn't figure out how to email each other. They decided it was because one of them used Netscape and the other used Internet Explorer, and decided just to use the phone from then on instead.

  26. All I did was NOT work by wsanders · · Score: 4, Informative

    Back in the last century, Usenet was alive and well and not yet overwhelmed by f-tards. You could actually make friends on alt.sysadmin.recovery or your local [a-z]*.singles group, or ask a technical question on comp.sys.something or other and get an intelligent response instead of a death threat from a fanboy.

    That my friend is the biggest change in the net for me.

    Google News is trying to keep the flame alive but it's a lost cause.

    --
    Give a man a fish and you have fed him for today. Teach a man to fish, and he'll say "WHERE'S MY FISH, YOU IDIOT?"
  27. nostalgia isn't what it used to be.. by somepunk · · Score: 2, Interesting

    When you remember those halcyon days in which the the state of the art of search was WAIS. I'll take today's internet, warts and all, thanks.

    --
    Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do. (Isaac Asimov)
  28. Re:Yahoo by TheCycoONE · · Score: 2, Informative

    Almost like search.yahoo.com?

  29. Malware!!! by Arslan+ibn+Da'ud · · Score: 2, Insightful

    That's the main tech boom since 1996! Think about it. Viruses existed back then, and they were destructive. They'd crash your machine on purpose, but not before alerting you to their presence. Botnets? Definitely a 21st-century tech. There was lots of spam, but it didn't contain viruses, and the web was pretty safe. Even using IE :) The big-name viruses: Melissa, ILoveYou, Blaster...all newer.

    Heck Smashing the Stack for Fun and Profit wasn't published until 1998.

    The net hasn't improved much since '96. It's the bad guys that have. Where will THEY be in 13 years?

    --

    Practice Kind Randomness and Beautiful Acts of Nonsense.

  30. 1996 ... those were the days ... by garry_g · · Score: 2, Informative

    We started our business in March 96 ... went online 3/6/96 ... back then, a 128k line was enough to supply a total of three POPs with internet ... private users were limited to use during off-hours (5PM through 8AM), though IIRC we didn't have hourly charges (apart from the dial-in cost for the people for their modem or ISDN connection)

    Ah, what fond memories - Web browsing without any M$ IE in sight ;)

  31. Re:No Huffie Post!?! Oh My GOSH!!! by harry666t · · Score: 3, Funny

    > It's where you had to go when you were traveling to the dungeon masters house ;)

    Aaaah, you mean the caves under the basement...

    I think that "outside" is that thing with sun and stuff. I saw it on a photo, it's incredible.

  32. Same ****, different year by orthancstone · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It was 13 years ago. Maybe I'm just young but that is an eternity in the world of computer technology.

    Is it really an eternity? What's so different anyway?

    Let's take blogging as an example. The concept of posting your thoughts online is a constant of the Internet (it isn't a new concept like some green Internet users/media think). It's just been refined (or redefined if you don't like the implication that it is better now, just more "user-friendly") versus the available methods of the past.

    Truth is, things haven't changed much on the net in 13 years. We're just implementing the same concepts with a different interfaces and tools. And some more bandwidth that allows larger, more robust concepts to be more feasible (streaming video for example). YouTube isn't anything new, it's just more realistic now than it was back then.

    So if it really is an eternity, we haven't done much other than flood the "pipes" with more "unwashed masses" and make streaming video work a bit better. File sharing, BBS (social sites are just profile-centric forums), IRC/chat rooms, knowledge sharing, and user interaction/arguing are all things that have existed for years and years. The only thing that makes it all "unrecognizable" from 1996 is that we've got fresh paint, newer paintbrushes, and a larger fence to cover.

  33. Re:No Huffie Post!?! Oh My GOSH!!! by Pictish+Prince · · Score: 2, Interesting

    No...Digg, Huffington Post, Gawker...Twitter, Facebook...

    So times were terrible back then! Imagine. I sometimes had to go to "friends' houses" and to the "theaters" and even step outside once or twice. I am very glad we have come this far.

    I didn't have to go out in 1988. There was more than enough reading on USENET to keep me occupied 24/7. And the shit was so much more interesting than on the sites mentioned. Ever read sci.nanotech?

    --
    Only his tendency toward a dazed stupor prevented him from screaming aloud.
  34. Our memories are faulty devices by freeweed · · Score: 4, Informative

    Starcraft was released March 31, 1998.

    Posted not to be a pedantic douche, but to point out that our memories are often imperfect. Starcraft, a revolution in online gaming in many respects, did not come out until 2 years after this article describes.

    Everyone posting in this thread about how they had all this unlimited, highspeed, MMO-full gaming with massive multimedia collections in 1996 - I'm sorry, but you're not remembering things very well. And it's easy enough to find examples that show why.

    1996 might not have been the $10/hr CIS days (that was 1994 for me), but it sure as hell wasn't anything like today. In 1996 we saw the very first TCP/IP games that weren't IPX tunneled through something like Heat.net. Web browsers existed, yes - and 95% of the pages out there were about someone's cat. Napster (ie: mp3 sharing of any large scale) was 3 years in the future. Software mp3 players had just appeared in the fall of 1995. Winamp, the first truly popular player, was a year away. Hardware players were at least 2 years away. Flash didn't really exist until the end of 1996.

    Anyway, that's just pulled from the first few posts I could find. Y'all are remembering 1999 at earliest. 1996 was a very different online beast. Splitting hairs? No, showing just how much changed in such a short period of time.

    --
    Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
  35. I guess I'm outdated by Target+Practice · · Score: 2, Funny

    No Digg, Huffington Post, Gawker... Twitter, Facebook...

    Am I the only one who finds such a world very comforting? Give me LORD, a 14.4 modem, and possibly let me keep SSH, and I'd feel like I'm on top of the world. I could probably even go without slashdot for a while... but don't bet on it.

    --
    There's a 68.71% chance you're right.
  36. Jurassic Pre-Web by zaivala · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I think 1996 was the year I finally got on the Web, or was it 1997? We all laughed at it, nobody wanted to pay per hour to spend 20 minutes loading a bad picture. Why, when you could get on FidoNet or UseNet for the cost of the modem? I think I got on FidoNet for the first time around 1988... as well as other less-noble BBS systems such as Wildcat and HUB.

  37. Memories by Soiden · · Score: 2

    I remember when I first had Internet, in 1998. I just surfed 20 minutes a day because of the high cost, and mainly IRC, ICQ, and my ISP's web xD

    --
    Minti: What's that huge shuriken in your back?! Kin: It's the instrument of my victory.