How do you enter your search phrase? With a quill and ink? :-)

Brilliant.

Given that movable type was invented around 1450 the posting title might better read "Google 1470" ;-)

Re Henning:

I guess Google was innovative even way back then. ;-)

Google: 200 Years Ago

+ Show video

So that's where Jacobus, the videoblogger of the 14th c., came from!

+ Show video

That was a nice one TOM/Haochi
Best part was "no results"

I like that picture, and the video was funny :P

Google Earth flat! lollll!!!

 blogoscoped.com/forum/110427.h ...
Yeah, neither was the copyright symbol...

Movable type was a beta from Google. It started with a Google Sammer of Code project.

"old" idea...
fury.com/google-circa-1960.php

LOL! Liking "Towne Crier"...

Was thinking, should "New!" not be replaced by "Hear Ye! Hear Ye!" I think so!

"He was kicked by a horse...faced woman in the balls"

lol!

Funny ...

Hey, is it possible to use that "Google VERY classic" or is it just an image? And if so, how?

thanks!

Emil: it's just a fake image. But maybe a google fan with some time may code it!
If phillip made that "google black and white" one, it's possible to do this one :)

lol, this is great!

It's fantastic! I love it.

ARR..Tis' Beta INDEED

Ironic that if this was on parchment it would still be around in another thousand years, but would the web pages of today also be there?

Even if the web page might be there in a couple of hundred years, will there be an interpreter which understands the HTML & JavaScript & image files & stylesheets of 2007? (Archive.org for instance is indexing HTML, but I sometimes think just showing PNGs or something would be more risk free...)

<< ... will there be an interpreter which understands the HTML & JavaScript & image files & stylesheets of 2007? >>

Well, some Javascript I wrote for a website in 1997 doesn't even work on today's browsers, so the chances are probably slim! (Although with the browsers being slightly more standards compliant now, there's hope that they may retain some backwards compatibility...)

if we can understand egypcian glyphs, why they won't understand our clean code?

What google will look in 3000

> if we can understand egypcian glyphs, why they
> won't understand our clean code?

For one thing, hyroglyphs are hammered into stone, right, so they are much more long-lived! I can't even find my own original homepage anymore these days (though it was probably the kind of "incident" also not recorded during ancient Egyptian times, the kind of daily thing that didn't make it into hyroglyphs). I also always found it funny that when you install an old version of Netscape (forgot which one, may have been v2...) in say 2002 or so, after installation you were returned to the Netscape homepage which then threw a JavaScript error immediately!

But I also think hyroglyphs as syntax may be less complex than the mass of CSS+HTML+JS+GIF+JPG+PNG combined. Not sure. I once believed HTML as format would be long-lived, but then even the standards maintainer introduced a change that stopped making HTML downdwards compatible (sending an XML content type for XHTML, an optional suggestion by the W3C, breaks old browsers, even though XHTML itself – served as HTML – fares OK on old browsers). And that's just within a decade or two!

> What google will look in 3000

There's this thing (by the NYT originally)... but I think it deserves an update one of these days!

graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2 ...

Fantastic. Any chance of a higher res image? I'd love to use it as wallpaper.

OK, here's a wallpaper version:

blogoscoped.com/files/google-1 ...

>What google will look in 3000

Look at this blank screen, touch the button on the bottom right, think what you want to know and it will appear.

No, it will just become part of your mammory and you will know about it.

James
Someone been reading Philipp's book?

:D Yup! I've read it but I wasn't thinking about the book when I posted that.

With islamic calendar 1407 is not so far :)

Woops! I meant memory! What? Mammory makes no sense? OMG! I googled it and I was talking about something wayyy off topic?