What is Digg?Sponsored by Activision
Band Hero view!
guitarhero.com - The biggest event music event of the year is now in your living room.
100 Comments
- misterpony, on 10/12/2007, -4/+101I think the Internet Archive doesn't save css or javascript so those screenshots aren't accurate. A lot of archived sites look the exact same.
- behn1220, on 10/12/2007, -3/+88My favorite interface is the one that says "INTERNAL SERVER ERROR. An internal server error has occured! Please try again later." Nice and simple...I don't see where I can vote, though.
- neoform, on 10/12/2007, -5/+52What the hell is that? 2003-2004?? All of those screen shots are just Digg v4 without it's CSS applied!
This page is pure *****. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+40INTERNAL SERVER ERROR
An internal server error has occured!
Please try again later.
I don't think I like this interface very much. - EricCiccone, on 10/12/2007, -5/+38Very cool to see how digg looked when it first started!
- _Caboose_, on 10/12/2007, -2/+332003-2004:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v223/343GS_Caboose/digg/digint2k34.jpg
2004-2005:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v223/343GS_Caboose/digg/digint2k45.jpg
2005-2006:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v223/343GS_Caboose/digg/digint2k56.jpg
2006-2007
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v223/343GS_Caboose/digg/digintup1.jpg - SpikeX, on 10/12/2007, -3/+27It's not that hard guys...
http://web.archive.org/web/*/digg.com - wakkow, on 10/12/2007, -3/+19Not sure why you were dugg down. You're totally correct.
- manic007, on 10/12/2007, -2/+17I prefer the 2005-2006 layout :(
- techie4life, on 10/12/2007, -1/+15http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Digg1.6.png
- affanjam, on 10/12/2007, -2/+15When I first saw the the new digg layout today I was like WTF am I on the right website. Still getting used to the nav at the top.
- sparkrainfir, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14some people use digg as a bookmarking site, if i see a topic i might be interested in, i'll digg so i can easily come back and view it when the site isn't down...
- JurneyAhed, on 10/12/2007, -3/+15number of diggs != pageviews
- msaleem, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13Please note that the initial data is taken from waybackmachine and so may not be completely aligned with the dates on which the Digg team made the interface updates. However, it is still interesting to see how the user interface evolved over time. It will also be interesting to see which one the Diggers like the best, balancing usability with speed.
- cyanid3, on 10/12/2007, -3/+14http://themulife.com.nyud.net:8090/?p=439
- seandfeeney, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11Internal error, duggmirror didn't even catch it, BUT SOMEHOW THE DIGGS STILL GROW!?! HOW? WHY?
- tgmoo, on 10/12/2007, -3/+12People are stupid. They see digg in the subject title and think it's a command.
- iashraf, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9Those screens are wack and don't accuratey represent Digg throughout the ages - just look as the screenshot of 3.0 ?
- Pattyo13, on 05/14/2009, -6/+13i like how people continue to digg even though no one can get to it. it was down at 40, and now it's at 90
- jole, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7They don't even have the error code right! A server error is 500! Everyone knows that :-) 400 is bad request.
- wingnut21, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Yeah, these are some ***** shots. It would be nice to have a poll with real screen shots.
- ek3s, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Yeah... I was about to say something about that. I've been looking at digg since launch and I clearly remember it not looking like total *****.
- jesstech, on 10/12/2007, -5/+11This is why we don't use 1&1, kiddies.
Also, screenshots are inaccurate. Internet archive doesn't always save stylesheets. I know digg didn't look like craigslist. What a stupid hack. No digg. - Protoss, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9I prefer the current interface to all the others, it's something about that top nav bar, just makes it much easier to get around.
- Lazybones, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7"pseudo-bookmark" this is why a REAL bookmark feature is needed. It sort of makes the digg count useless in figuring out if something is actually good and interesting based on diggs if everyone digg's it without looking at it.
- justinjacobs, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Looks like the site exploded. Duggmirror didn't catch it either.
Edit: Beaten to it. I got to refresh more often. - arostad, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5you look like your missing some interfaces..
- Arkonnan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Yeah, this new layout is a bit too busy for my liking. It's one of the reasons why I don't go to del.icio.us often.
- nick34, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4yeah, i dont get it either.
- armbar, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5So that it's easy to find later tonight when it's back up. I don't always digg because I like the story...sometimes it's to save it for later.
- tomboy501, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I don't like the way the new "made popular" replaces the original submission time stamp when a story hits the front page. You can see it once you open up the comments...but, from a stats perspective, it would actually be great to have both listed once it hits FP. You could then see how fast (or how long) it takes stories to reach the front page at a glance.
- starlite, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Uhm, this is nothing like what digg looked like before the firefox design treatment. The wayback machine didn't apply the styles correctly, so all we're getting is text.
It used to be all a drab shade of blue, and there was much bitching when it finally got a nice graphical treatment. - Trihedralguy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Is it me or is the 2005 - 2006 one wrong? My digg never looked like that...
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3The GREEN is so fugly!!
- MarvelingOne, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6try the other cache links
this one worked for me, I could even vote
http://themulife.com.nyud.net:8080/?p=439 - BlindIrishman, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I was just getting used to the v3 layout! I miss my left hand sidebar.
- epohs, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4One thing that I don't understand is under the article title on the main page it says:
"3monkeys submitted, made popular 7 minutes ago"
But then when you view the article's detail page it says:
"3monkeys submitted 1 hour 14 minutes ago"
I think the "submitted, " on the main page is redundant, if the date that is shown is going to be when it was made popular. - M4cb0y, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I like everything about this layout except the nav at the top.. It would be nice to have an option to revert back to the old one.
Oh well, guess I'm just gonna have to get used to it... - biggbrother, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Yet another Digg story about Digg. Yawn.
- DrSkrud, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Ditto. I also appreciate the widescreen-friendliness of the layout.
- freff, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Tell me I wasn't the only one that wanted to click on the Luke Skywalker's hand story.
I am such a geek. - Somebee, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3I am wondering why this story is not being buried for being inaccurate? As someone already stated, these are just screenshots of some cached versions from archive.org WITHOUT stylesheets, and missing pictures etc. Totally innacurate. The layout DIGG had just hours ago is not even present.
Please provide pictures of how the DIGG-layout have changed and update your article, or bury this thing. - MrSunshine, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Completely inaccurate, lame and spam. The person who wrote that blog entry didn't post the real older layouts, they're just the plain HTML without any images taken from archive.org like others said above.
- murtlest, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"Man this brings back memories."
Does it? Then you probably remember that digg never looked like that. - _Caboose_, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Indeed, digg's gone through more changes than what are shown here - a few screenshots are missing, unfortunately.
- prasincs, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2wow.. nice... server error... elegant I must say....
- srg13, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2> "What the hell is that? 2003-2004?? All of those screen shots are just Digg v4 without it's CSS applied!"
It looks more to me like the right versions, just no CSS. The wikipedia article has better screenshots.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digg
Version 1 looked more like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Digg1.6.png - TriSight, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Not only that, I really like the subcategories as well as how they have broken the videos away from the other links. Very nice.
- foolfromhell, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2But.... wheres Digg 2.0?
- skilletsavior35, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2ya digg has gone a ways and i loved every upgrade but i think i like how it looked just when vs3 came out insted of this one....i dont know why but i think it looked cooler
-
Show 51 - 100 of 102 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 
