←back to thread

271 points nimbusega | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.308s | source
Show context
jgrahamc ◴[] No.42065305[source]
This doesn't look like a print newspaper. Print newspapers are much denser (in general) and have different headline sizes to emphasize the editor's choice of stories. This looks like a corporate blog home page or something. Some people will like this presentation; I'm pretty happy with HN as it is. But congratulations on shipping!
replies(7): >>42066032 #>>42066131 #>>42066435 #>>42066945 #>>42068716 #>>42069330 #>>42072822 #
tessierashpool ◴[] No.42066945[source]
I agree, but I'm biased. I built basically the same app as OP back in 2009 and it had different headline sizes like a newspaper:

https://github.com/gilesbowkett/hacker_newspaper/blob/master...

I kept it running for 5 or 10 years but eventually let it die.

edit: I'm not hating on OP btw. their version has pics, which mine doesn't. just agreeing that I believe the visual hierarchy inherent to newspaper title design is an important benefit of the format.

replies(2): >>42067145 #>>42070151 #
lysace ◴[] No.42067145[source]
> the visual hierarchy inherent to newspaper title design is an important benefit of the format

Agreed. This is also why old-school print design product catalogs often had superior presentation compared to today's web UIs for browsing hierarchically organized products. Everything is given the same visual weight and is formatted the same way.

Anyway, improving on what you did with the tooling that's easily available in 2024 but wasn't in 2009 seems like a fun challenge.

replies(1): >>42067773 #
1. tessierashpool ◴[] No.42067773[source]
yeah, digging up that screenshot (and the repo) really made me realize how primitive this solution was. it was also a very basic implementation of the whole headline sizes concept.

there was an app called Flipboard at the time which did something similar, but for different news sources, although its model of interactivity was a bit more gimmicky than the endless scroll. (which, for all its faults, is really simple and easy to use.)