Douglas Adams expressed this well:

“I've come up with a set of rules that describe our reactions to technologies:

1. Anything that is in the world when you’re born is normal and ordinary and is just a natural part of the way the world works.

2. Anything that's invented between when you’re fifteen and thirty-five is new and exciting and revolutionary and you can probably get a career in it.

3. Anything invented after you're thirty-five is against the natural order of things.”

For me the stage that came after this is, "Well, change is going to happen, so either I need to get off the merry-go-round or I need to learn to like it." Geocities and FTP clients are as dead as fan-fold, green-and-white line printer paper, and for the same reason: we found better ways to serve the same needs.

Justifying one's nostalgia by pining for the days of 14.4 kbps modems doesn't make a lot of sense. If they were good, then surely my first modem, a 300-baud acoustic coupler was better. Although I feel a tug of nostalgia when I see one, it wasn't better. Optimizing to save a resource we have in abundance makes as much sense as depression-era grandparents saving bits of string for possible reuse. It wastes that most precious of non-renewable resources: your time.

It's not just age, it's a sense of loss. I can still go down to the store and buy milk in bag form, just as I could when I was a kid, so I don't feel nostalgic about it even though it's old. I feel nostalgic about the web of my youth because that place is gone now and it'll likely never come back.

In tech circles we like to obsess over new technologies and all of the amazing new possibilities they've brought. We don't spend nearly as much time talking about all we've lost.

I also don't find that new smartphones have much touch-based interface latency; but even so, that kind of latency doesn't have anything to do with the internet, nor the halcyon days of late 1998. To my recollection browsing the web in the late 90s was far more exciting but also far less useful than today.

The modern internet has a lot of inefficiency, but I don't see how you could seriously claim it's slower than what we had 20 years ago. Sometimes heavy web applications are relatively slow because they're underoptimized, but that's less of a technology failing and more of a developer failing. Most websites load spectacularly faster, and perform better, than all but completely static HTML websites from two decades ago despite having much larger byte footprints.

Some websites overloaded the 98 web by being an entire page of diced and sliced graphics that assembled the page. Most were mainly text and appeared pretty much instantaneously. Images came slower than the article you could be already reading if you were on dial up.

One of the things I dislike about the current web, is how slow most sites have become - mostly thanks to an absurd overhead of JS and third party SaaS just to display a text article with a few pictures. The number of sites that will unreadbly bounce the content around as various web fonts, icon fonts and other trivia load is pretty ridiculous. It's the main reason I now browse with JS off and white list JS for a tiny few.

https://danluu.com/input-lag/

But hypertext is an application, and the web was always about hyperlinked text as well as embedded content. The <script> and <applet> tags and now defunct concepts like VRML demonstrate that the "only static, only hypertext" version of the web you miss were more due to the primitive nature of an undeveloped platform than a state of grace and purity which has since been defiled by the ability to do computation on the web... the intent for the web to host both static and interactive content was there practically from the beginning.

>Does anyone else feel nostalgia for the pre-"web app" days of the internet? I'm talking about personal sites on Geocities and web rings built on communities of shared interest.

I don't. I like being able to watch videos and play games on the web, and buy things, and so on.

And webrings were fun, but modern social media offers a much bigger and more varied set of communities than the old web ever had. I know that's an unpopular sentiment to voice on HN, but as far as most end users are concerned, Reddit and Twitter and even Facebook are useful in ways that IRC and web chatrooms never were.

Social media is just about as mainstream as the telephone now. Everyone who was on those forums and BBS systems and IRC is probably also on social media.. along with their parents and kids. The web long ago got too big to draw narrow demographic conclusions about. And everything you mentioned apart from BBS is still around.

I mean, my elderly mother uses Facebook and I wouldn't call her "obsessively upvote/view focused." She is obsessed with sharing pictures of her grandkids doing everything, though...

I don't think there's much structural about Yahoo Answers being what it is. I think it's mostly the population.

Most of it is undiscoverable, private, or short form. There are very few people putting up public multi page tutorials or project summaries in the way that they used to.

This created space for passionate amateurs to create content for their niche. You got wonderfully personalized, quirky sites that didn’t look weird or suspicious and, importantly, actually got traffic (or what passed for a decent amount of traffic at the time.)

The rise of Google, security issues, “walled gardens”, blogging platforms, and YouTube have basically ended the ability of a new amateur site to get a significant amount of new traffic. Internet stardom has moved to YouTube, Twitter or more specialized communities like Reddit, StackExhange, or Wikipedia. The Wikia networks have driven out most need for fan sites. Social networks are a better sharing mechanism than personal blogs meant for keeping friends and family up to date.

This all has had the effect that the internet “feels” far more structured and professionalized than its early days, and IMO is much more a “winner take all” environment for content. I miss the amateur web the same reason I go to high school sports and watch low ranked college football teams- the play may not be as good, but passion is the same, the games feel more human and occasionally you see unexpected flashes of brilliance, beauty, and serendipity that you’ll never see in the professional world.

For all the people lamenting the loss of the old internet, most of it is still there(irc,ftp,rss,ncurses email clients) -- you can still use it. You should probably ask yourself why you aren't.

Because there's no gopher client for macOS.

I bet if Google indexed Gopher sites at the outset, Gopher would still be a thing.

They have very little use. There's also a web proxy:

http://gopher.floodgap.com/gopher/gw

Browsing it makes clear why Gopher would not still be a thing, except in the same sense that there are hobbyists who maintain Model Ts and steam engines and whatnot. For a time, Gopher was a miracle and a wonder. That time lasted about a year. The web does all it does and infinitely more.

Gopher pretty much died long before Google was a thing. Here's a good article: https://www.minnpost.com/business/2016/08/rise-and-fall-goph... (lots of interesting comments below the article from many of the people involved)

There is a vibrant international community of people still on gopher, and a lot of us run our own servers. Check out gopher://gopherproject.org

There you'll find a getting started file, and other useful things such as a curated site listing (think DMOZ for gopher) called the Gopher Lawn.

Definitely! There's a lot of that sentiment over at Micro.blog [1], which has built a community of writers & indie software developers (especially developers from the RSS era, if you've heard of MarsEdit or NetNewsWire). There's an emphasis on personal blogging, keeping things simple, and using dedicated desktop/mobile apps (usually made by solo/indie developers) for each task, instead of the website. And as part of the IndieWebCamp [2] projects, there's even people making web rings again [3] as well.

There was also a search engine someone showed on HN recently, that didn't have a crawler - the only pages listed were the specific pages (not domains!) that people submitted to the index. That gave the searches some serendipity, you never found what you searched for but stumbled on something that someone else thought was interesting anyway.

[1] https://micro.blog

[2] https://indieweb.org/

[3] http://th3core.com/talk/traffic/i-made-a-web-ring-5-days-ago...

90% of the web apps that are useful to me would be equally useful as native local apps with local data. As a native MacOS or iOS program they would be hugely faster, without latency, and just as useful out of signal area (still common enough that it happens daily for me).

That would leave me to choose which I wanted to sync either internally or via something like dropbox.

Most of the innovations in the browser that enable apps also promote and enable tracking, auto start videos, and JS loaded ads, and use of the browser as surrogate OS. Mostly I find this a serious misstep. I don't miss bad design and sites that were cut up bits of image etc.

As exciting as those days were, I wouldn't want to go back to dial-up, CRT monitors, no-broadband, no-wi-fi, no-wikipedia, no-dropbox, no-stackoverflow, no-git, no-digital-distribution, etc.

And yes there was broadband in the old days. It just wasn't widely distributed. It was mostly at businesses and universities. As broadband became more common, web sites got needlessly heavier.

On the plus side, future generations will never know the horrors of a RealPlayer "Buffering..." message.

* Unless you really needed punch that monkey.

100% this. About 8 years ago, I had LIGHTNING fast loading times on every page I visited. 800-1000ms was average, on a connection that is slower than mine is today... Now 4-8 seconds is average, and the new Gmail takes 10-12 seconds to load.

I'm nostalgic for the days when the web was faster and more functional than it is today.

As for figuring out how to turn the web into an app platform, Netscape and Sun might have gotten farther in the 90s if it wasn't for Microsoft. There used to be a saying in the 2000s that MS held back technology for a decade.

http://wiby.me is a search engine that indexes pages like the ones you miss. Full disclosure though, I made it.

I don't understand the premise. Tumblr is / was over ten times larger than Geocities. It did what you're describing. It was still wildly popular with young people just as recently as a few years ago.

With Geocities you could see millions of high school art students demonstrating for the entire world that they don't know the first thing about design or color.

Tumblr is the epitome of a walled garden. The flowers look pretty, but you still have to plant them in neat, orderly rows. Even Facebook's Pieces of Flair offered more of a creative outlet.

You can still make oversized blinking purple Comic Sans text on a black background above an animated "Under Construction" GIF. But you have to do it in CSS.

They've moved to DeviantArt now.

There's also something about the snappiness of desktop apps on hardware 1/100th the speed of what we're running now that I dearly miss.