http://www.duncanriley.com/2009/02/26/the-web-in-1996-wasnt-as-bad-as-slate-makes-out/ blogging is not a spectator sport Mon, 15 Mar 2010 17:39:20 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 http://www.duncanriley.com/2009/02/26/the-web-in-1996-wasnt-as-bad-as-slate-makes-out/comment-page-1/#comment-320455 The Web is 20! | Emerging Technologies Consulting Mon, 16 Mar 2009 12:57:04 +0000 http://www.duncanriley.com/?p=1533#comment-320455 [...] The web in 1996 wasn’t as bad as Slate makes out (duncanriley.com) [...] [...] The web in 1996 wasn’t as bad as Slate makes out (duncanriley.com) [...]

]]> http://www.duncanriley.com/2009/02/26/the-web-in-1996-wasnt-as-bad-as-slate-makes-out/comment-page-1/#comment-338466 Des Walsh Mon, 02 Mar 2009 12:11:46 +0000 http://www.duncanriley.com/?p=1533#comment-338466 By the way, that resource I put together, the arts policies of the political parties? Gone, not archived. I used to be such a fan/advocate of the Internet Archive/Wayback Machine, but sadly it's a shadow of the original dream. By the way, that resource I put together, the arts policies of the political parties? Gone, not archived. I used to be such a fan/advocate of the Internet Archive/Wayback Machine, but sadly it's a shadow of the original dream.

]]> http://www.duncanriley.com/2009/02/26/the-web-in-1996-wasnt-as-bad-as-slate-makes-out/comment-page-1/#comment-338465 Des Walsh Mon, 02 Mar 2009 12:00:30 +0000 http://www.duncanriley.com/?p=1533#comment-338465 Singularly dumb, to rely on the Internet Archive and people who were "watching the Web closely back then". "Watching"? Oh, like the people who "watch" social media now and declare it all meaningless?<br>Your post prompted me to check back on a resource I put together in 1996 and posted. I wanted to be able to compare the arts policies of the parties in the Australian federal electoral sphere. I was amazed that from my home office in Sydney, at no cost other than the already paid connection cost, I was able to pull together a unique resource for anyone who wanted to compare the policies of the parties.<br>The other bit the Slate writer doesn't get is the community aspect. Yes, on Compuserve we paid so much in Australia that we used special tools to download threads, reply/comment offline and then upload them in a batch. But we were part of global conversations that were simply not possible before for any but some very privileged people, or very savvy techies. And then travelling and meeting face to face people, you had become friends with virtually, was something so amazing that friends and family who stayed determinedly offline simply did not get.<br>We did "not very much"? Little does your Slate person know. Singularly dumb, to rely on the Internet Archive and people who were “watching the Web closely back then”. “Watching”? Oh, like the people who “watch” social media now and declare it all meaningless?
Your post prompted me to check back on a resource I put together in 1996 and posted. I wanted to be able to compare the arts policies of the parties in the Australian federal electoral sphere. I was amazed that from my home office in Sydney, at no cost other than the already paid connection cost, I was able to pull together a unique resource for anyone who wanted to compare the policies of the parties.
The other bit the Slate writer doesn't get is the community aspect. Yes, on Compuserve we paid so much in Australia that we used special tools to download threads, reply/comment offline and then upload them in a batch. But we were part of global conversations that were simply not possible before for any but some very privileged people, or very savvy techies. And then travelling and meeting face to face people, you had become friends with virtually, was something so amazing that friends and family who stayed determinedly offline simply did not get.
We did “not very much”? Little does your Slate person know.

]]> http://www.duncanriley.com/2009/02/26/the-web-in-1996-wasnt-as-bad-as-slate-makes-out/comment-page-1/#comment-338001 Des Walsh Mon, 02 Mar 2009 06:11:46 +0000 http://www.duncanriley.com/?p=1533#comment-338001 By the way, that resource I put together, the arts policies of the political parties? Gone, not archived. I used to be such a fan/advocate of the Internet Archive/Wayback Machine, but sadly it's a shadow of the original dream. By the way, that resource I put together, the arts policies of the political parties? Gone, not archived. I used to be such a fan/advocate of the Internet Archive/Wayback Machine, but sadly it's a shadow of the original dream.

]]> http://www.duncanriley.com/2009/02/26/the-web-in-1996-wasnt-as-bad-as-slate-makes-out/comment-page-1/#comment-338000 Des Walsh Mon, 02 Mar 2009 06:00:30 +0000 http://www.duncanriley.com/?p=1533#comment-338000 Singularly dumb, to rely on the Internet Archive and people who were "watching the Web closely back then". "Watching"? Oh, like the people who "watch" social media now and declare it all meaningless?<br>Your post prompted me to check back on a resource I put together in 1996 and posted. I wanted to be able to compare the arts policies of the parties in the Australian federal electoral sphere. I was amazed that from my home office in Sydney, at no cost other than the already paid connection cost, I was able to pull together a unique resource for anyone who wanted to compare the policies of the parties.<br>The other bit the Slate writer doesn't get is the community aspect. Yes, on Compuserve we paid so much in Australia that we used special tools to download threads, reply/comment offline and then upload them in a batch. But we were part of global conversations that were simply not possible before for any but some very privileged people, or very savvy techies. And then travelling and meeting face to face people, you had become friends with virtually, was something so amazing that friends and family who stayed determinedly offline simply did not get.<br>We did "not very much"? Little does your Slate person know. Singularly dumb, to rely on the Internet Archive and people who were “watching the Web closely back then”. “Watching”? Oh, like the people who “watch” social media now and declare it all meaningless?
Your post prompted me to check back on a resource I put together in 1996 and posted. I wanted to be able to compare the arts policies of the parties in the Australian federal electoral sphere. I was amazed that from my home office in Sydney, at no cost other than the already paid connection cost, I was able to pull together a unique resource for anyone who wanted to compare the policies of the parties.
The other bit the Slate writer doesn't get is the community aspect. Yes, on Compuserve we paid so much in Australia that we used special tools to download threads, reply/comment offline and then upload them in a batch. But we were part of global conversations that were simply not possible before for any but some very privileged people, or very savvy techies. And then travelling and meeting face to face people, you had become friends with virtually, was something so amazing that friends and family who stayed determinedly offline simply did not get.
We did “not very much”? Little does your Slate person know.

]]> http://www.duncanriley.com/2009/02/26/the-web-in-1996-wasnt-as-bad-as-slate-makes-out/comment-page-1/#comment-319420 Des Walsh Mon, 02 Mar 2009 04:11:46 +0000 http://www.duncanriley.com/?p=1533#comment-319420 By the way, that resource I put together, the arts policies of the political parties? Gone, not archived. I used to be such a fan/advocate of the Internet Archive/Wayback Machine, but sadly it's a shadow of the original dream. By the way, that resource I put together, the arts policies of the political parties? Gone, not archived. I used to be such a fan/advocate of the Internet Archive/Wayback Machine, but sadly it's a shadow of the original dream.

]]> http://www.duncanriley.com/2009/02/26/the-web-in-1996-wasnt-as-bad-as-slate-makes-out/comment-page-1/#comment-319419 Des Walsh Mon, 02 Mar 2009 04:00:30 +0000 http://www.duncanriley.com/?p=1533#comment-319419 Singularly dumb, to rely on the Internet Archive and people who were "watching the Web closely back then". "Watching"? Oh, like the people who "watch" social media now and declare it all meaningless?<br>Your post prompted me to check back on a resource I put together in 1996 and posted. I wanted to be able to compare the arts policies of the parties in the Australian federal electoral sphere. I was amazed that from my home office in Sydney, at no cost other than the already paid connection cost, I was able to pull together a unique resource for anyone who wanted to compare the policies of the parties.<br>The other bit the Slate writer doesn't get is the community aspect. Yes, on Compuserve we paid so much in Australia that we used special tools to download threads, reply/comment offline and then upload them in a batch. But we were part of global conversations that were simply not possible before for any but some very privileged people, or very savvy techies. And then travelling and meeting face to face people, you had become friends with virtually, was something so amazing that friends and family who stayed determinedly offline simply did not get.<br>We did "not very much"? Little does your Slate person know. Singularly dumb, to rely on the Internet Archive and people who were “watching the Web closely back then”. “Watching”? Oh, like the people who “watch” social media now and declare it all meaningless?
Your post prompted me to check back on a resource I put together in 1996 and posted. I wanted to be able to compare the arts policies of the parties in the Australian federal electoral sphere. I was amazed that from my home office in Sydney, at no cost other than the already paid connection cost, I was able to pull together a unique resource for anyone who wanted to compare the policies of the parties.
The other bit the Slate writer doesn't get is the community aspect. Yes, on Compuserve we paid so much in Australia that we used special tools to download threads, reply/comment offline and then upload them in a batch. But we were part of global conversations that were simply not possible before for any but some very privileged people, or very savvy techies. And then travelling and meeting face to face people, you had become friends with virtually, was something so amazing that friends and family who stayed determinedly offline simply did not get.
We did “not very much”? Little does your Slate person know.

]]> http://www.duncanriley.com/2009/02/26/the-web-in-1996-wasnt-as-bad-as-slate-makes-out/comment-page-1/#comment-319172 birthday gifts Fri, 27 Feb 2009 01:45:36 +0000 http://www.duncanriley.com/?p=1533#comment-319172 1996 was the year when every one thought that net is the ultimate advancement one could ever experience. With time net evolved and renewed its history. So, I guess net is always great and will remain the same but in any era, with every little improvement to can enhance its own charm. 1996 was the year when every one thought that net is the ultimate advancement one could ever experience. With time net evolved and renewed its history. So, I guess net is always great and will remain the same but in any era, with every little improvement to can enhance its own charm.

]]> http://www.duncanriley.com/2009/02/26/the-web-in-1996-wasnt-as-bad-as-slate-makes-out/comment-page-1/#comment-319087 The Web Was Always Awesome - Even in 1996 | netZoo Thu, 26 Feb 2009 08:45:13 +0000 http://www.duncanriley.com/?p=1533#comment-319087 [...] cheaper) at Griffith Uni than it was for individuals like Australian blogger Duncan Riley, and he isn’t buyin’ Farhad’s tri-dub putdown [...] [...] cheaper) at Griffith Uni than it was for individuals like Australian blogger Duncan Riley, and he isn’t buyin’ Farhad’s tri-dub putdown [...]

]]> http://www.duncanriley.com/2009/02/26/the-web-in-1996-wasnt-as-bad-as-slate-makes-out/comment-page-1/#comment-319093 skribe Thu, 26 Feb 2009 07:36:56 +0000 http://www.duncanriley.com/?p=1533#comment-319093 I'd stopped paying by the hour for my internet in 93. By 96 I'd been on permanent dialup for 2 years. /. began in 96 so there was plenty to do =) Also there was a stack of mu* (the Second Life's of their day) to while away the endless hours between shopping trips to Amazon. I stopped buying newspapers in 96 so the news coverage was pretty good. I remember scripting up pages to grab 'my news headlines' and comics and show them on my personal news page. This was before rss and it was a constant battle to keep ahead of the sites who were always changing the layout in order to defeat folks like me. Good times. I'd stopped paying by the hour for my internet in 93. By 96 I'd been on permanent dialup for 2 years. /. began in 96 so there was plenty to do =) Also there was a stack of mu* (the Second Life's of their day) to while away the endless hours between shopping trips to Amazon. I stopped buying newspapers in 96 so the news coverage was pretty good. I remember scripting up pages to grab 'my news headlines' and comics and show them on my personal news page. This was before rss and it was a constant battle to keep ahead of the sites who were always changing the layout in order to defeat folks like me. Good times.

]]>