--- /dev/null
+<!DOCTYPE html>
+<html>
+ <head>
+ <meta charset="UTF-8" />
+ <title>Athene.Gay</title>
+ <link rel="stylesheet" href="../main.css" />
+ </head>
+ <body class="whole-site">
+ <div>
+ <iframe class="embed-title" src="../shared/title.html"> </iframe>
+ <div class="main-container">
+ <div class="main">
+ <div class="entry">
+ <a href="../index.html">Home</a>
+ <div class="title-block">
+ <a class="blog-title" target="_blank" href="https://athene.gay">
+ <h3>This Website</h3>
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="datestamp">2025</h3>
+ </div>
+ <div class="content">
+ <p>It's the website you're looking at right now, baby!!</p>
+ <p>
+ I can't pretend this website is particularly complex. It's pure
+ HTML and CSS. I don't even have any javascript in it apart from
+ the embedded hit counter at the bottom. Maybe I'll use some in
+ future if it's necessary but I'm writing each entry directly in
+ the HTML instead of pulling from a database or such, so outside
+ of doing some fancy shit I don't see why I'd ever need to. Here,
+ here's a live screenshot of the site in VSCode so you can see
+ I'm really doing this the 'old-fashioned' way:
+ </p>
+ <a href="../img/projects/websitevscode.png">
+ <img
+ class="blog-img-lrg"
+ src="../img/projects/websitevscode.png"
+ alt="a screenshot of vscode with the html of this page loaded up in it."
+ />
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The web is too damn complicated nowadays. I don't think this is
+ a particularly controversial statement. Everyone seems to want
+ to make everything into a single-page application, host with
+ node or some .net backing with a big MVC structure behind it,
+ have myriad front-end technologies to make everything
+ oh-so-slick. And sure, there's a place for that. I work for a
+ company whose main product is an Angular SPA with a big .net
+ backend that is hugely multifunctional.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ But personal websites do not need that, really. I kind of
+ fundamentally disagree with it. A portfolio website can impress
+ with your talent for design, for sure, but when you're working
+ on something like this, where it's jsut for you - is any of it
+ really necessary?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ All that overhead certainly makes it slower. The web is so damn
+ <i>slow</i> now. I got gigabit internet recently, which has
+ certainly been revelatory for streaming and steam game
+ downloads, but actual day-to-day web use is basically
+ unimpacted. I can download sites faster, theoretically, but the
+ framework is doing so much internally that it makes practically
+ no difference.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And for a small site of my own, I simply do not want that. I
+ want something that feels fast and responsive. And what's faster
+ than a static website?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ So this is what that is, in a very classic style. Pure HTML and
+ CSS. Iframes for stuff like the links and footer bars. Manual
+ linking and organisation. A marquee tag for the header, gotta
+ respect the classics.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ I even have a links panel, which I hope to fill out with links
+ to friends' and acquaintances little homes on the internet.
+ Webrings were fuckin' cool and we've lost them, so let's bring
+ them back. If you want to be included, shout me on
+ <a target="_blank" href="https://bsky.app/profile/athene.gay"
+ >bluesky</a
+ >.
+ </p>
+ </div>
+ </div>
+ </div>
+ </div>
+ <iframe class="embed-links" src="../shared/links.html"> </iframe>
+ <iframe class="embed-footer" src="../shared/footer.html"> </iframe>
+ </div>
+ </body>
+</html>
projects / gnargle.github.io.git / commitdiff
