News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:UX brutalism by 0xcde4c3db on Friday August 11, 2017 @09:44AM (#14989555)
Arguably, a major point of Brutalism is letting the essence of the materials come through rather than covering them up. In that sense, I think "Brutalist" web design would connote embracing things like hypertext, links, and hierarchical structure rather than building up the illusion that your website is some ethereal dance of pure unsullied UX. The infamous "Motherfucking Website" [1] might be the best-known example of deliberately showcasing this approach.

[1] http://motherfuckingwebsite.com/

Re:UX brutalism by b4ux1t3 on Friday August 11, 2017 @10:34AM (#14990027)
I think that early web (say, pre-Web 2.0) was the epitome of Brutalist design. Because resources were limited, you had to make the most of what you had, leading to that no-nonsense, sparse style. I think it's beautiful, in its own way.
Re:UX brutalism by et-al on Friday August 11, 2017 @12:01PM (#14991089)
That's an interesting idea. There's something very raw about those university.edu/department/~username pages that existed with the most basic of HTML--unstyled tables, blue anchor links, images only when you needed them, and almost no Yavascript.

That rawness, without too many attribute tags let alone CSS, is brutalist.

Re:UX brutalism by lazerwalker on Friday August 11, 2017 @03:52PM (#14993503)
Olia Lialina has a great piece about the aesthetics of "Prof. Dr. Style": http://contemporary-home-computing.org/prof-dr-style/
Re:UX brutalism by et-al on Saturday August 12, 2017 @03:44PM (#14999593)
Thanks for this link! Never knew someone gave this "style" a name. (And an apt one to boot)
Re:UX brutalism by kirkules on Friday August 11, 2017 @12:58PM (#14991878)
Btw, the university pages you mention are still extremely common, at least in mathematics-related fields
Re:UX brutalism by roywiggins on Friday August 11, 2017 @01:20PM (#14992157)
When I'm searching for info on something, if I land on a page with no styling and no multimedia beyond hypertext and images, I know I've hit something good because it's almost certainly an academic's personal page!
Re:UX brutalism by 0xffff2 on Friday August 11, 2017 @09:29PM (#14995828)
Yep, "existed" is the wrong tense. My university's entire CS and Engineering schools run on those style of pages.
Re:UX brutalism by rusk on Friday August 11, 2017 @10:45AM (#14990134)
I think you're giving early web "design" far too much credit. To say something is "brutalist" describes an intentional aesthetic - early pages really where purely functional, and any aesthetic flourishes really were limited by the technology despite aspirations to design something beautiful (whatever that means).
Re:UX brutalism by b4ux1t3 on Friday August 11, 2017 @10:56AM (#14990262)
Fair point. I didn't mean to imply it was an intentional design choice, just that it was "selected for" by the "nature" of the platform (ha!). And with regard to "beauty", I just meant that it was almost elegant in a way that modern design tries to do away with.

For instance, if a site didn't have a proper search function, but had a pretty logical URL scheme, you could often find what you need by trying a few permutations in the address bar. The limitations of the system meant web "designers" (I'm using that term loosely) had to build fairly organized and unintentionally "Brutalist" sites if they wanted to be used by any large number of people.

Hope that made sense, I'm still waiting for my coffee to kick in.

Re:UX brutalism by RUG3Y on Friday August 11, 2017 @11:57AM (#14991021)
In other words, a "Brutalist" website would look like a website from 1996. Which I dig, because I dislike the fancy stuff.
Re:UX brutalism by killjoywashere on Friday August 11, 2017 @01:16PM (#14992120)
Photo.net until recently. Built on tcl.
Re:UX brutalism by RUG3Y on Friday August 11, 2017 @03:09PM (#14993174)
I've never looked at photo.net, now I wish I could see it before it changed.

edit: I just checked it out on the wayback machine, I definitely like the old site better. Not as "pretty", but easier to navigate.

Re:UX brutalism by dfabulich on Friday August 11, 2017 @01:28PM (#14992227)
Motherfucking Website is too wide in my browser window. It would be a lot easier to read on desktop with even just one line of CSS:

    body { max-width: 60ch; }
Re:UX brutalism by notduncansmith on Friday August 11, 2017 @01:35PM (#14992314)
Re:UX brutalism by rthomas6 on Friday August 11, 2017 @02:04PM (#14992600)
Re:UX brutalism by tarboreus on Saturday August 12, 2017 @04:05PM (#14999689)
Yes! The "better" site had crappy contrast.
Re:UX brutalism by chriswarbo on Friday August 11, 2017 @05:21PM (#14994415)
This can be achieved by adjusting the size of the browser window. Not only does this give fine-grained control to all users, but as a bonus it frees up the horizontal space to be used to display other things alongside.
Re:UX brutalism by sixo on Friday August 11, 2017 @01:24PM (#14992194)
So maybe... Craigslist?
Re:UX brutalism by miopa on Friday August 11, 2017 @01:28PM (#14992233)
e.g. http://radio.spodeli.org/kanal103/chetvrtok/2000-2200.html

Brutalist on-demand radio streaming platform that I've build.

Re:UX brutalism by SwellJoe on Friday August 11, 2017 @01:51PM (#14992491)
That's a pretty good selection of tracks.
Re:UX brutalism by miopa on Tuesday August 15, 2017 @04:55AM (#15016519)
"Kanal 103" is a cult indie FM station from Skopje.

Recordings expire (overwritten) after one week.

Re:UX brutalism by slim on Friday August 11, 2017 @01:01PM (#14991922)
Let's resurrect WAP
Re:UX brutalism by 0xdeadbeefbabe on Friday August 11, 2017 @11:39AM (#14990740)
Maybe this is my own horrible opinion, but that site would feel less pretentious in monospaced courier.
Re:UX brutalism by debaserab2 on Friday August 11, 2017 @12:20PM (#14991389)
How so? Times is browser default and was easier to read than a monospaced font.
Re:UX brutalism by 0xdeadbeefbabe on Friday August 11, 2017 @01:34PM (#14992299)
It's easier for me to read, as far as I can tell. http://russrizzo.net/ is an example, but maybe it's just size.
Re:UX brutalism by CupOfJava on Friday August 11, 2017 @11:03AM (#14990335)
What does the site you linked look like in IE6? Is there an Easter egg?
Re:UX brutalism by TuringTest on Friday August 11, 2017 @11:46AM (#14990849)
The Easter egg is that it works perfectly, and it has the same exact aspect as in any other modern browser.
Re:UX brutalism by ktRolster on Friday August 11, 2017 @03:25PM (#14993312)
a major point of Brutalism is letting the essence of the materials come through rather than covering them up

So......something like this? http://www.zerobugsandprogramfaster.net/brutalist.html That can get recursive real fast.

Or theoretically this: https://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/matrix/images/8/84/Matr... Harder to read, though, at least for people like me who don't have much experience.