"It avoids being fashionable and therefore never appears antiquated. Unlike fashionable design, it lasts many years – even in today’s throwaway society."
In 2011, 6% of internet traffic was mobile, compared to 56% in 2021 (according to the first Google result I clicked)
I wouldn't say not having a mobile-responsive design back then was entirely a design failure. I recall in the early days of smartphones, the vision for mobile browsers was they were "desktop class" and would display pages exactly like how they are on desktop. Look at Steve Jobs' original Safari demo during the iPhone reveal. Everyone was blown away by the full desktop experience of The New York Times and Amazon. This website was a few years into the iPhone revolution, but it was early enough into the mobile responsiveness era that I don't think it takes away from their point. The current design could be adapted to a mobile responsive page without needing an overhaul of the existing design language.
And Gruber's CSS has more to do with his obsessive to a paralyzing degree nature, than to sticking to whatever was said in a keynote 15 years ago.
Besides, double tapping a paragraph zooms into what becomes a good reading experience on mobile. It’s that dangerous “good enough”.
He obviously should update his site and ditch Verdana, we have better fonts and screens this days. But, if anything, it’s a testament of how good the original design was that it stood the test of time and what was designed for IE5/6 on 800x600px screen is still good on an iPhone 12.
I don't know what's going on with Gruber—at this point it feels like he's made an almost religious choice to never add another line of CSS. LOL
In fact, the reel-to-reel probably felt dated within much less than 10 years.