Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.javascript > #4087 > unrolled thread

know its ipad

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.javascript

Contents

  know its ipad Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> - 2011-07-12 14:35 +1000
    Re: know its ipad "Richard Cornford" <Richard@litotes.demon.co.uk> - 2011-07-12 09:04 +0100
      Re: know its ipad Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> - 2011-07-12 21:19 +1000
        Re: know its ipad 123Jim <jnkjnjnini@uhnuhnunuhnuy.invalid> - 2011-07-12 13:09 +0100
          Re: know its ipad Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> - 2011-07-13 07:35 +1000
            Re: know its ipad 123Jim <jnkjnjnini@uhnuhnunuhnuy.invalid> - 2011-07-13 01:00 +0100
              Re: know its ipad 123Jim <jnkjnjnini@uhnuhnunuhnuy.invalid> - 2011-07-13 01:14 +0100
              Re: know its ipad Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> - 2011-07-13 15:57 +1000
                Re: know its ipad RobG <rgqld@iinet.net.au> - 2011-07-12 23:29 -0700
                  Re: know its ipad RobG <rgqld@iinet.net.au> - 2011-07-12 23:31 -0700
                    Re: know its ipad Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> - 2011-07-13 17:25 +1000
                      Re: know its ipad Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2011-07-13 12:53 +0200
                      Re: know its ipad David Mark <dmark.cinsoft@gmail.com> - 2011-10-09 18:35 -0700
                        Re: know its ipad dhtml <dhtmlkitchen@gmail.com> - 2011-10-09 22:39 -0700
                          Re: know its ipad Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> - 2011-10-10 17:42 +1100
                            Re: know its ipad David Mark <dmark.cinsoft@gmail.com> - 2011-10-10 21:40 -0700
                          Re: know its ipad David Mark <dmark.cinsoft@gmail.com> - 2011-10-10 21:38 -0700
                  Re: know its ipad Ry Nohryb <jorge@jorgechamorro.com> - 2011-07-13 04:20 -0700
                    Re: know its ipad RobG <rgqld@iinet.net.au> - 2011-07-13 04:34 -0700
                      Re: know its ipad Ry Nohryb <jorge@jorgechamorro.com> - 2011-07-13 04:58 -0700
                        Re: know its ipad 123Jim <jnkjnjnini@uhnuhnunuhnuy.invalid> - 2011-07-13 13:50 +0100
                          Re: know its ipad dhtml <dhtmlkitchen@gmail.com> - 2011-07-13 11:02 -0700
                            Re: know its ipad Ry Nohryb <jorge@jorgechamorro.com> - 2011-07-13 11:59 -0700
                              Re: know its ipad 123Jim <jnkjnjnini@uhnuhnunuhnuy.invalid> - 2011-07-13 21:32 +0100
                                Re: know its ipad Ry Nohryb <jorge@jorgechamorro.com> - 2011-07-13 14:28 -0700
                                  Re: know its ipad 123Jim <jnkjnjnini@uhnuhnunuhnuy.invalid> - 2011-07-13 23:46 +0100
                                    Re: know its ipad Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> - 2011-07-14 10:01 +1000
                                  Re: know its ipad RobG <rgqld@iinet.net.au> - 2011-07-13 16:51 -0700
                                    Re: know its ipad Ry Nohryb <jorge@jorgechamorro.com> - 2011-07-14 02:04 -0700
                                      Re: know its ipad Ry Nohryb <jorge@jorgechamorro.com> - 2011-07-14 15:11 -0700
                                        Re: know its ipad RobG <rgqld@iinet.net.au> - 2011-07-14 21:54 -0700
                                          Re: know its ipad Yoda <jorgechamorro@mac.com> - 2011-07-15 03:14 -0700
                                          Re: know its ipad Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-07-15 13:06 +0100
                                            Re: know its ipad Ry Nohryb <jorge@jorgechamorro.com> - 2011-07-15 08:14 -0700
                                              Re: know its ipad Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-07-15 20:00 +0100
                                                Re: know its ipad Ry Nohryb <jorge@jorgechamorro.com> - 2011-07-15 12:12 -0700
                                                  Re: know its ipad Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-07-16 01:14 +0100
                                                    Re: know its ipad Jorge <jorge%jorgechamorro.com@gtempaccount.com> - 2011-07-16 08:56 -0700
                                                      Re: know its ipad Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-07-16 23:07 +0100
                                                        Re: know its ipad RobG <rgqld@iinet.net.au> - 2011-07-17 16:40 -0700
                                                          Re: know its ipad Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> - 2011-07-18 11:33 +1000
                                                            Re: know its ipad RobG <rgqld@iinet.net.au> - 2011-07-17 19:54 -0700
                                                              Re: know its ipad Ry Nohryb <jorge@jorgechamorro.com> - 2011-07-18 02:19 -0700
                                                            Re: know its ipad Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2011-07-18 21:41 +0200
                                                              Re: know its ipad Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> - 2011-07-19 07:13 +1000
                                                            Re: know its ipad Dr J R Stockton <reply1129@merlyn.demon.co.uk> - 2011-07-19 20:18 +0100
                                        Re: know its ipad Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2011-07-17 10:34 +0200
                                          Re: know its ipad David Mark <dmark.cinsoft@gmail.com> - 2011-10-09 19:02 -0700
                                            Re: know its ipad Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2011-10-10 13:49 +0200
                                              Re: know its ipad David Mark <dmark.cinsoft@gmail.com> - 2011-10-10 21:56 -0700
                                Re: know its ipad dhtml <dhtmlkitchen@gmail.com> - 2011-07-15 09:56 -0700
                                Re: know its ipad David Mark <dmark.cinsoft@gmail.com> - 2011-10-09 18:48 -0700
                Re: know its ipad Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2011-07-13 11:57 +0200
                Re: know its ipad Ry Nohryb <jorge@jorgechamorro.com> - 2011-07-13 04:13 -0700
          Re: know its ipad Dr J R Stockton <reply1128@merlyn.demon.co.uk> - 2011-07-13 18:19 +0100
            Re: know its ipad "Evertjan." <exjxw.hannivoort@interxnl.net> - 2011-07-14 08:12 +0000
        Re: know its ipad Richard Cornford <Richard@litotes.demon.co.uk> - 2011-07-13 08:05 -0700
          Re: know its ipad Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> - 2011-07-14 08:34 +1000
    Re: know its ipad Elegie <elegie@anonymous.invalid> - 2011-07-12 10:13 +0200
    Re: know its ipad Ry Nohryb <jorge@jorgechamorro.com> - 2011-07-12 04:19 -0700
    Re: know its ipad Bjoern Hoehrmann <bjoern@hoehrmann.de> - 2011-07-12 13:24 +0200

Page 2 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4  Next page →

#4140

On 13/07/2011 12:58, Ry Nohryb wrote:
> On Jul 13, 1:34 pm, RobG<rg...@iinet.net.au>  wrote:
>> On Jul 13, 9:20 pm, Ry Nohryb<jo...@jorgechamorro.com>  wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Jul 13, 8:29 am, RobG<rg...@iinet.net.au>  wrote:
>>
>>>> On Jul 13, 3:57 pm, Andrew Poulos<ap_p...@hotmail.com>  wrote:
>>
>>>>> On 13/07/2011 10:00 AM, 123Jim wrote:
>>
>>>>>> On 12/07/2011 22:35, Andrew Poulos wrote:
>>>>>>> On 12/07/2011 10:09 PM, 123Jim wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 12/07/2011 12:19, Andrew Poulos wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 12/07/2011 6:04 PM, Richard Cornford wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Andrew Poulos wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> How can I know if a web page is running on an iPad without
>>>>>>>>>>> parsing navigator.platform (ie. without browser sniffing)?
>>>>>> ..............................
>>
>>>>>>>> Create your pages Using percentage for display width, limit it with
>>>>>>>> max-width in pixels, make your layout fluid if necessary. Use a strict
>>
>>>>>>> That's one of the issues. What maximum pixel width: 1024, 980 or 768?
>>
>>>>>> Take a look at the templates here:
>>>>>> http://www.cssliquid.com/
>>
>>>>>> Fluid design allows your page to look good and be functional with many
>>>>>> different screen resolutions.
>>
>>>>> Liquid design works well for text-based pages but what do you do with
>>>>> images. Do you allow them to scale?
>>
>>>>> Anyhow the issue is not the visual design on the pages but that I need
>>>>> to activate events like touch but only on devices where it makes sense.
>>>>> For example, will events not be available on browsers that have them on
>>>>> devices that support touch events when those browsers are not on those
>>>>> "supported" devices?
>>
>>>> You should be testing for touch support, not what the device is. The
>>>> more browser agnostic you make your application, the happier everyone
>>>> will be.
>>
>>> I disagree, totally. The iPad/iPhone/iPods require a totally different
>>> page, both in terms of layout, design, and programming.
>>
>> "Require" how? I spend about 1 hour a day browsing sites on an iPhone
>> and find that most "desktop" sites are more functional and better to
>> use that "mobile" sites where the functionality is dumbed down,
>> zooming and panning are often prevented and portrait mode enforced.
>> Many such sites are clueless about "mobile" site design.
>
> Yes, you can do a bad mobile site or a good mobile site. But a (good)
> mobile site is totally different than (good) a desktop site.

This is what CSS is for .. you can create a style for tiny mobile 
devices and a style for larger screens (including the mobile tablets - 
they have reasonable resolution), but the content is the same. It would 
be bizarre and wasteful to have to create a different page for every 
device out there. How many pages, how many devices?

As for multiple touch and gestures .. you can build it into the page, 
but if it's not used on some devices it shouldn't be a problem.

Besides for multiple touch you need a third hand to hold these tablets 
;) or look silly clamping it between your legs .. it's too much.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4146

On Jul 13, 5:50 am, 123Jim <jnkjnjn...@uhnuhnunuhnuy.invalid> wrote:
> On 13/07/2011 12:58, Ry Nohryb wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jul 13, 1:34 pm, RobG<rg...@iinet.net.au>  wrote:
> >> On Jul 13, 9:20 pm, Ry Nohryb<jo...@jorgechamorro.com>  wrote:
>
> >>> On Jul 13, 8:29 am, RobG<rg...@iinet.net.au>  wrote:
>
> >>>> On Jul 13, 3:57 pm, Andrew Poulos<ap_p...@hotmail.com>  wrote:
>
> >>>>> On 13/07/2011 10:00 AM, 123Jim wrote:
>
> >>>>>> On 12/07/2011 22:35, Andrew Poulos wrote:
> >>>>>>> On 12/07/2011 10:09 PM, 123Jim wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On 12/07/2011 12:19, Andrew Poulos wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> On 12/07/2011 6:04 PM, Richard Cornford wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> Andrew Poulos wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> How can I know if a web page is running on an iPad without
> >>>>>>>>>>> parsing navigator.platform (ie. without browser sniffing)?
> >>>>>> ..............................
>
> >>>>>>>> Create your pages Using percentage for display width, limit it with
> >>>>>>>> max-width in pixels, make your layout fluid if necessary. Use a strict
>
> >>>>>>> That's one of the issues. What maximum pixel width: 1024, 980 or 768?
>
> >>>>>> Take a look at the templates here:
> >>>>>>http://www.cssliquid.com/
>
> >>>>>> Fluid design allows your page to look good and be functional with many
> >>>>>> different screen resolutions.
>
> >>>>> Liquid design works well for text-based pages but what do you do with
> >>>>> images. Do you allow them to scale?
>
> >>>>> Anyhow the issue is not the visual design on the pages but that I need
> >>>>> to activate events like touch but only on devices where it makes sense.
> >>>>> For example, will events not be available on browsers that have them on
> >>>>> devices that support touch events when those browsers are not on those
> >>>>> "supported" devices?
>
> >>>> You should be testing for touch support, not what the device is. The
> >>>> more browser agnostic you make your application, the happier everyone
> >>>> will be.
>
> >>> I disagree, totally. The iPad/iPhone/iPods require a totally different
> >>> page, both in terms of layout, design, and programming.
>
> >> "Require" how? I spend about 1 hour a day browsing sites on an iPhone
> >> and find that most "desktop" sites are more functional and better to
> >> use that "mobile" sites where the functionality is dumbed down,
> >> zooming and panning are often prevented and portrait mode enforced.
> >> Many such sites are clueless about "mobile" site design.
>
> > Yes, you can do a bad mobile site or a good mobile site. But a (good)
> > mobile site is totally different than (good) a desktop site.
>
> This is what CSS is for .. you can create a style for tiny mobile
> devices and a style for larger screens (including the mobile tablets -
> they have reasonable resolution), but the content is the same. It would

CSS media queries are supported in some of those mobile devices'
browsers.
http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-mediaqueries/#media0

CSS media queries are still a candidate recommendation (not an
official Technical Recommendation).

> be bizarre and wasteful to have to create a different page for every
> device out there. How many pages, how many devices?
Can't really say what the resolution will be for devices that have not
yet been released.
--
Garrett

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4147

On Jul 13, 8:02 pm, dhtml <dhtmlkitc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jul 13, 5:50 am, 123Jim <jnkjnjn...@uhnuhnunuhnuy.invalid> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 13/07/2011 12:58, Ry Nohryb wrote:
>
> > > On Jul 13, 1:34 pm, RobG<rg...@iinet.net.au>  wrote:
> > >> On Jul 13, 9:20 pm, Ry Nohryb<jo...@jorgechamorro.com>  wrote:
>
> > >>> On Jul 13, 8:29 am, RobG<rg...@iinet.net.au>  wrote:
>
> > >>>> On Jul 13, 3:57 pm, Andrew Poulos<ap_p...@hotmail.com>  wrote:
>
> > >>>>> On 13/07/2011 10:00 AM, 123Jim wrote:
>
> > >>>>>> On 12/07/2011 22:35, Andrew Poulos wrote:
> > >>>>>>> On 12/07/2011 10:09 PM, 123Jim wrote:
> > >>>>>>>> On 12/07/2011 12:19, Andrew Poulos wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>> On 12/07/2011 6:04 PM, Richard Cornford wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>> Andrew Poulos wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>>> How can I know if a web page is running on an iPad without
> > >>>>>>>>>>> parsing navigator.platform (ie. without browser sniffing)?
> > >>>>>> ..............................
>
> > >>>>>>>> Create your pages Using percentage for display width, limit it with
> > >>>>>>>> max-width in pixels, make your layout fluid if necessary. Use a strict
>
> > >>>>>>> That's one of the issues. What maximum pixel width: 1024, 980 or 768?
>
> > >>>>>> Take a look at the templates here:
> > >>>>>>http://www.cssliquid.com/
>
> > >>>>>> Fluid design allows your page to look good and be functional with many
> > >>>>>> different screen resolutions.
>
> > >>>>> Liquid design works well for text-based pages but what do you do with
> > >>>>> images. Do you allow them to scale?
>
> > >>>>> Anyhow the issue is not the visual design on the pages but that I need
> > >>>>> to activate events like touch but only on devices where it makes sense.
> > >>>>> For example, will events not be available on browsers that have them on
> > >>>>> devices that support touch events when those browsers are not on those
> > >>>>> "supported" devices?
>
> > >>>> You should be testing for touch support, not what the device is. The
> > >>>> more browser agnostic you make your application, the happier everyone
> > >>>> will be.
>
> > >>> I disagree, totally. The iPad/iPhone/iPods require a totally different
> > >>> page, both in terms of layout, design, and programming.
>
> > >> "Require" how? I spend about 1 hour a day browsing sites on an iPhone
> > >> and find that most "desktop" sites are more functional and better to
> > >> use that "mobile" sites where the functionality is dumbed down,
> > >> zooming and panning are often prevented and portrait mode enforced.
> > >> Many such sites are clueless about "mobile" site design.
>
> > > Yes, you can do a bad mobile site or a good mobile site. But a (good)
> > > mobile site is totally different than (good) a desktop site.
>
> > This is what CSS is for .. you can create a style for tiny mobile
> > devices and a style for larger screens (including the mobile tablets -
> > they have reasonable resolution), but the content is the same. It would
>
> CSS media queries are supported in some of those mobile devices'
> browsers.http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-mediaqueries/#media0

That would be good if it were only a matter of styling the contents.

> CSS media queries are still a candidate recommendation (not an
> official Technical Recommendation).
>
> > be bizarre and wasteful to have to create a different page for every
> > device out there. How many pages, how many devices?
>
> Can't really say what the resolution will be for devices that have not
> yet been released.

The iPhone 4 has 2x the resolution of an iPhone 2G/3G/3GS, but no
sites have needed any modifications, so what ?

The point is: a small screen + no mouse -> radically different user
interface + site/page layout + programming.

And a mobile device is battery powered: don't use setTimeout/
setInterval()s in tight loops, unless you want your page/site to drain
the phone's battery (as JQuery does).

So yes, programming (a web page/application) for a mobile/tablet is
very different than programming for a desktop.
--
Jorge.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4148

On 13/07/2011 19:59, Ry Nohryb wrote:
.................................................................<SNIPPED>
>
> The iPhone 4 has 2x the resolution of an iPhone 2G/3G/3GS, but no
> sites have needed any modifications, so what ?
>
> The point is: a small screen + no mouse ->  radically different user
> interface + site/page layout + programming.

I don't buy it ... a finger is pretty much like a mouse pointer .. only 
you can see better with a mouse pointer depending on how fat those 
fingers might be.

>
> And a mobile device is battery powered: don't use setTimeout/
> setInterval()s in tight loops, unless you want your page/site to drain
> the phone's battery (as JQuery does).
>
> So yes, programming (a web page/application) for a mobile/tablet is
> very different than programming for a desktop.
> --

Are you suggesting iPad users surfing the web live in fear of stumbling 
on a website that uses wasteful power hungry Javascripts? .. It's a poor 
device if that is the case.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4149

On Jul 13, 10:32 pm, 123Jim <jnkjnjn...@uhnuhnunuhnuy.invalid> wrote:
>
> I don't buy it ... a finger is pretty much like a mouse pointer .. only
> you can see better with a mouse pointer depending on how fat those
> fingers might be.

Yeah, that's what Microsoft thought too: see what's the windows mobile
marketshare now. Apple has demonstrated it: UIs for touch are
different than UIs for mice.

> Are you suggesting iPad users surfing the web live in fear of stumbling
> on a website that uses wasteful power hungry Javascripts?

No fears, but they'll notice if your page drains it.

> It's a poor device if that is the case.

Not poor, it simply runs on (small) batteries.
--
Jorge.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4153

On 13/07/2011 22:28, Ry Nohryb wrote:
> On Jul 13, 10:32 pm, 123Jim<jnkjnjn...@uhnuhnunuhnuy.invalid>  wrote:
>>
>> I don't buy it ... a finger is pretty much like a mouse pointer .. only
>> you can see better with a mouse pointer depending on how fat those
>> fingers might be.
>
> Yeah, that's what Microsoft thought too: see what's the windows mobile
> marketshare now. Apple has demonstrated it: UIs for touch are
> different than UIs for mice.

Marketing over substance ,, but a nice toy anyway! .. people like toys 
.. and are suckers for hype.
I think I already said that it will be possible to include the 'fancy 
stuff', multi touch, gestures etc but still have a functional page for 
other non multi touch devices.


>
>> Are you suggesting iPad users surfing the web live in fear of stumbling
>> on a website that uses wasteful power hungry Javascripts?
>
> No fears, but they'll notice if your page drains it.
>
>> It's a poor device if that is the case.
>
> Not poor, it simply runs on (small) batteries.
> --

I'm pretty sure nothing eats battery power worse than video .. most 
Javascripts would not compare too badly against it. but it's still a 
good idea to write efficient javascript ... Not only for one device with 
a small battery.

Over to you.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4154

On 14/07/2011 8:46 AM, 123Jim wrote:
> On 13/07/2011 22:28, Ry Nohryb wrote:
>> On Jul 13, 10:32 pm, 123Jim<jnkjnjn...@uhnuhnunuhnuy.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>> I don't buy it ... a finger is pretty much like a mouse pointer .. only
>>> you can see better with a mouse pointer depending on how fat those
>>> fingers might be.
>>
>> Yeah, that's what Microsoft thought too: see what's the windows mobile
>> marketshare now. Apple has demonstrated it: UIs for touch are
>> different than UIs for mice.
>
> Marketing over substance, but a nice toy anyway! .. people like toys
> .. and are suckers for hype.

A business I know has deployed iPads to their employees to do things 
such as give them access to the company databases when the employees are 
not at their computers. So for this business, tablets are certainly not 
a toy.

> I think I already said that it will be possible to include the 'fancy
> stuff', multi touch, gestures etc but still have a functional page for
> other non multi touch devices.

The drag and drop interactions in the elearning course I'm developing 
certainly do not work on an iPad though they've work on the desktop 
since IE 4 and on Opera, Firefox, Safari, Chrome... That it doesn't work 
on the iPad is something I'm investigating.

Andrew Poulos

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4155

On Jul 14, 7:28 am, Ry Nohryb <jo...@jorgechamorro.com> wrote:
> On Jul 13, 10:32 pm, 123Jim <jnkjnjn...@uhnuhnunuhnuy.invalid> wrote:
>
>
>
> > I don't buy it ... a finger is pretty much like a mouse pointer .. only
> > you can see better with a mouse pointer depending on how fat those
> > fingers might be.
>
> Yeah, that's what Microsoft thought too: see what's the windows mobile
> marketshare now.

OT, but what the heck...

Microsoft's mobile marketshare is rubbish because their mobile OS
sucked from the very beginning and the bigger phone manufacturers
refused to use it in their high volume phones. That may change if MS
ever "gets" mobile devices - they haven't yet and the hurdle to obtain
a critical mass in market share is getting bigger.

MS has a habit of just hanging around and finally getting big when
others shoot themselves in the foot (IBM, Apple in desktop, Netscape
in browsers, Palm in PDAs). But in the mobile and smart phone market
has been different - by the time the big guys like Nokia and Sony
Ericsson started to lose their gloss, Google and Apple had already
raised the bar (and RIM just keeps hanging in there) so MS couldn't
just inherit the market.

> Apple has demonstrated it: UIs for touch are
> different than UIs for mice.

Yes, but web pages don't need to care. Apple's devices, OS and browser
are designed so that current web pages work just fine. The only thing
missing are hover events, and hurray for that.

The design principles are pretty simple - make links and buttons
*look* like links and buttons so that users know touching/clicking
will navigate somewhere or make something happen. Turn hover events
into touch/click events, so users can touch a graph or whatever and
get a data bubble instead of hovering.

It really is quite simple. Try the following site:

<URL: http://www.seabreeze.com.au/graphs/qld2.asp >

The wind graphs work using hover on desktop, on mobile they work with
touch to make the data bubble appear. Dragging the bubble changes the
data just like moving the cursor on a desktop. Double-tap the graph
and it fills the screen.

That site was designed before touch devices were widely available
(perhaps before they were available at all), yet maintains its
functionality on various devices.


> > Are you suggesting iPad users surfing the web live in fear of stumbling
> > on a website that uses wasteful power hungry Javascripts?
>
> No fears, but they'll notice if your page drains it.

I doubt that jQuery itself has a perceptible effect on power
consumption. The device backlight is far more significant for power
use so I would expect anyone on a jQuery site will run down their
battery because of that rather than the power requirements of
scripting.

Of course many jQuery developers use incredibly inefficient selector-
based scripts - it is common to see $(this).attr(value) - but I would
need to see evidence from a quality study to be convinced that they
significantly, or even noticeably, affect power consumption solely as
a consequence of using jQuery.


--
Rob

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4158

On Jul 14, 1:51 am, RobG <rg...@iinet.net.au> wrote:
> (...)
> It really is quite simple. Try the following site:
>
> <URL:http://www.seabreeze.com.au/graphs/qld2.asp>
> (...)
> That site was designed before touch devices were widely available
> (perhaps before they were available at all), yet maintains its
> functionality on various devices.

Agreed, yes indeed, that's a page designed for a desktop that (barely)
functions on an iPhone, but it's far away from the best possible
experience for mobile users.

> > > Are you suggesting iPad users surfing the web live in fear of stumbling
> > > on a website that uses wasteful power hungry Javascripts?
>
> > No fears, but they'll notice if your page drains it.
>
> (...) affect power consumption solely as
> a consequence of using jQuery.

I'm just saying that most (if not every) pages I see that use jQuery
have timers installed in a loop and that's not good for the phone's
battery. When your page is doing nothing (useful), it should just let
the cpu go to sleep(), especially on a mobile. To monitor your
iphone's power consumption use Instruments / Energy diagnostics / cpu
activity.
--
Jorge.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4205

On Jul 14, 11:04 am, Ry Nohryb <jo...@jorgechamorro.com> wrote:
> On Jul 14, 1:51 am, RobG <rg...@iinet.net.au> wrote:
>
> > (...)
> > It really is quite simple. Try the following site:
>
> > <URL:http://www.seabreeze.com.au/graphs/qld2.asp>
> > (...)
> > That site was designed before touch devices were widely available
> > (perhaps before they were available at all), yet maintains its
> > functionality on various devices.
>
> Agreed, yes indeed, that's a page designed for a desktop that (barely)
> functions on an iPhone, but it's far away from the best possible
> experience for mobile users.

To see what I mean, go, for example, to <http://thenextweb.com> with a
desktop browser, and then with an iPad.
--
Jorge.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4210

On Jul 15, 8:11 am, Ry Nohryb <jo...@jorgechamorro.com> wrote:
> On Jul 14, 11:04 am, Ry Nohryb <jo...@jorgechamorro.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jul 14, 1:51 am, RobG <rg...@iinet.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > (...)
> > > It really is quite simple. Try the following site:
>
> > > <URL:http://www.seabreeze.com.au/graphs/qld2.asp>
> > > (...)
> > > That site was designed before touch devices were widely available
> > > (perhaps before they were available at all), yet maintains its
> > > functionality on various devices.
>
> > Agreed, yes indeed, that's a page designed for a desktop that (barely)
> > functions on an iPhone, but it's far away from the best possible
> > experience for mobile users.

Considering it hasn't been optimised for mobile at all, it's a great
example that good design will work regardless. Yes, it could do with a
few updates for mobile devices, but there is no need for a separate
site.

>
> To see what I mean, go, for example, to <http://thenextweb.com> with a
> desktop browser, and then with an iPad.

I use Firefox on a PC and an iPhone.


A great example of that the web should not become. The "desktop"
version (they really have no clue about the device, I presume they are
browser sniffing) is over 2mb, with 420kb of script in 16 separate
files. The mobile version is (predictably) a dumbed-down version of
what I presume is the main content. Pitty the didn't apply the same
rigour to the desktop version, then they could have one version of the
site and deliver their data very much more effectively.

Rotating the iPhone from portrait to landscape causes all sorts of
(script driven) reflow, the articles expand off the edge of the screen
so I have to resize them to fit, and the article that was formerly in
view is scrolled a couple of screens higher. A pretty disasterous
breaking of the native UI. Rotating back to portrait and it jiggles
around for a few seconds again, scrolling the article that I was
reading off the bottom of the screen. A wonderful example of why
developers should leave the native UI alone and not try to write a
better one using script.

If you need convincing of the cluelessness of the developers, try this
code from the ncomments.js file:

  if (typeof($jl)=='function') { // if jquery is available, get all
relevant nodes

    $jl('.livefyre-ncomments[article_id='+article_id
+']').each(function(i,e) {

      nodes.push(e);

    });

  } else { // else just use this shitty old livefyreIndex thing

    nodes.push(livefyreIndex[article_id]);

  }

Or perhaps my sarcasm-o-meter is not set correctly.


--
Rob

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4212

On Jul 15, 6:54 am, RobG <rg...@iinet.net.au> wrote:
> On Jul 15, 8:11 am, Ry Nohryb <jo...@jorgechamorro.com> wrote:
> > On Jul 14, 11:04 am, Ry Nohryb <jo...@jorgechamorro.com> wrote:
> > > On Jul 14, 1:51 am, RobG <rg...@iinet.net.au> wrote:
> > > > (...)
> > > > It really is quite simple. Try the following site:
>
> > > > <URL:http://www.seabreeze.com.au/graphs/qld2.asp>
> > > > (...)
> > > > That site was designed before touch devices were widely available
> > > > (perhaps before they were available at all), yet maintains its
> > > > functionality on various devices.
>
> > > Agreed, yes indeed, that's a page designed for a desktop that (barely)
> > > functions on an iPhone, but it's far away from the best possible
> > > experience for mobile users.
>
> Considering it hasn't been optimised for mobile at all, it's a great
> example that good design will work regardless. Yes, it could do with a
> few updates for mobile devices, but there is no need for a separate
> site.
>
> > To see what I mean, go, for example, to <http://thenextweb.com> with a
> > desktop browser, and then with an iPad.
>
> I use Firefox on a PC and an iPhone.
>
> A great example of that the web should not become. (...)


RobG, what I wanted you to see is that their desktop and mobile
versions are *completely* different. It's not a one page fits all
solution. My point is that two completely different pages should be
two completely different branches.

You keep insisting in mixing them up, and I'm wondering why, and my
best guess is that you still don't see the need to serve different
*contents* per page, so you think "If I just fix this and that then
the desktop page -as it is- will work on a mobile too".

Yeah, That's right. You can do that: a one page for all. But then
you're ignoring that a mobile/tablet is not as a desktop.

The problem is that a page that's good for a mobile is not as good for
a desktop, and viceversa. I mean good as in providing the best
possible user experience.

For example, the fact that you can, on the iPhone, double-click on a
column to zoom it in, does not mean that a page with three columns is
a good layout for an iPhone.

Just look at the apps (native apps) to see what a good user experience
means (for a mobile). The screens' layouts and the UIs have nothing to
do with a desktop browser web page, simply because the screen is
smaller (and it will always be), there's no mouse, and many other
things (did I say that it's running on batteries?) that one should
have in consideration when designing an app for these devices.

ISTM that you simply don't agree with me on that. You think that you
can happily shoehorn the same one-thousand pixels-wide web page into a
mobile's screen (which is true) and do some CSS and UI hacks/fixes
here and there and still be providing the best user experience for
both (which is not true).

To recap: IMO, a good mobile page is !== a good desktop page. You can
be lazy (or subpar) and try to serve the same thing to everybody. Or
you can do the best for each, but then you're better off branching as
soon as possible (sniff the browser's http headers @ the server),
because it will be easier to develop, and easier to maintain, and it
makes sense to keep different things in different places, instead of
mixed up.
--
Jorge.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4214

RobG <rgqld@iinet.net.au> writes:

> On Jul 15, 8:11 am, Ry Nohryb <jo...@jorgechamorro.com> wrote:
<snip>
>> To see what I mean, go, for example, to <http://thenextweb.com> with a
>> desktop browser, and then with an iPad.
>
> I use Firefox on a PC and an iPhone.

I tried it on an iPad.  The first time, safari crashed (I don't recall
that every happening before).  I could not reproduce that but subsequent
attempts all failed at some point giving me a blank screen.  This was
100% repeatable, though exactly what sequence of selections and
"scrolls" produce it seemed to vary from trial to trial.  I won't be
visiting again!

There is a "view desktop version" button and that works better on the
iPad than on my desktop (I had to re-size the window to avoid horizontal
scrolling).  It is very slow on the iPad but that could probably be
fixed -- there are seeming very similar sites that are much more
responsive.  Unfortunately it keeps reverting to the iPad version (in a
somewhat confused form it seems) when I click on a link so the site
would be, in my opinion, better if the special version were removed.

<snip>
-- 
Ben.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4216

On Jul 15, 2:06 pm, Ben Bacarisse <ben.use...@bsb.me.uk> wrote:
> RobG <rg...@iinet.net.au> writes:
> > On Jul 15, 8:11 am, Ry Nohryb <jo...@jorgechamorro.com> wrote:
> <snip>
> >> To see what I mean, go, for example, to <http://thenextweb.com> with a
> >> desktop browser, and then with an iPad.
>
> > I use Firefox on a PC and an iPhone.
>
> I tried it on an iPad.  The first time, safari crashed (I don't recall
> that every happening before).  I could not reproduce that but subsequent
> attempts all failed at some point giving me a blank screen.  This was
> 100% repeatable, though exactly what sequence of selections and
> "scrolls" produce it seemed to vary from trial to trial.  I won't be
> visiting again!
>
> There is a "view desktop version" button and that works better on the
> iPad than on my desktop (I had to re-size the window to avoid horizontal
> scrolling).  It is very slow on the iPad but that could probably be
> fixed -- there are seeming very similar sites that are much more
> responsive.  Unfortunately it keeps reverting to the iPad version (in a
> somewhat confused form it seems) when I click on a link so the site
> would be, in my opinion, better if the special version were removed.
>
> <snip>

And if they had attempted to mix up both versions in a single branch,
it would very likely be... even worse yet. So that proves: nothing.
--
Jorge.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4220

Ry Nohryb <jorge@jorgechamorro.com> writes:

> On Jul 15, 2:06 pm, Ben Bacarisse <ben.use...@bsb.me.uk> wrote:
>> RobG <rg...@iinet.net.au> writes:
>> > On Jul 15, 8:11 am, Ry Nohryb <jo...@jorgechamorro.com> wrote:
>> <snip>
>> >> To see what I mean, go, for example, to <http://thenextweb.com> with a
>> >> desktop browser, and then with an iPad.
>>
>> > I use Firefox on a PC and an iPhone.
>>
>> I tried it on an iPad.  The first time, safari crashed (I don't recall
>> that every happening before).  I could not reproduce that but subsequent
>> attempts all failed at some point giving me a blank screen.  This was
>> 100% repeatable, though exactly what sequence of selections and
>> "scrolls" produce it seemed to vary from trial to trial.  I won't be
>> visiting again!
>>
>> There is a "view desktop version" button and that works better on the
>> iPad than on my desktop (I had to re-size the window to avoid horizontal
>> scrolling).  It is very slow on the iPad but that could probably be
>> fixed -- there are seeming very similar sites that are much more
>> responsive.  Unfortunately it keeps reverting to the iPad version (in a
>> somewhat confused form it seems) when I click on a link so the site
>> would be, in my opinion, better if the special version were removed.
>>
>> <snip>
>
> And if they had attempted to mix up both versions in a single branch,
> it would very likely be... even worse yet. So that proves: nothing.

Yes, they could have made the site worse than it is.  I thought you were
citing it as an example of how to do the separation well.  Was it just
an example of a site that does it, no matter how unsuccessful the
attempt?

<snip>
-- 
Ben.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4221

On Jul 15, 9:00 pm, Ben Bacarisse <ben.use...@bsb.me.uk> wrote:
>
> Yes, they could have made the site worse than it is.  I thought you were
> citing it as an example of how to do the separation well.  Was it just
> an example of a site that does it, no matter how unsuccessful the
> attempt?

Yes you got it, an example of how to do the separation well.
--
Jorge.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4224

Ry Nohryb <jorge@jorgechamorro.com> writes:

> On Jul 15, 9:00 pm, Ben Bacarisse <ben.use...@bsb.me.uk> wrote:
>>
>> Yes, they could have made the site worse than it is.  I thought you were
>> citing it as an example of how to do the separation well.  Was it just
>> an example of a site that does it, no matter how unsuccessful the
>> attempt?
>
> Yes you got it, an example of how to do the separation well.

It was a fail for two reasons: (1) The separation was not done properly in
that the desktop version kept reverting to the iPad version on a link
clink.  (2) Doing it well means getting both sites right and that was
not done.

-- 
Ben.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4232

On 16 jul, 02:14, Ben Bacarisse <ben.use...@bsb.me.uk> wrote:
>
> It was a fail for two reasons: (1) The separation was not done properly in
> that the desktop version kept reverting to the iPad version on a link
> clink.  (2) Doing it well means getting both sites right and that was
> not done.

Well separated because m.thenextweb.com is a totally different thing
than thenextweb.com. Whether the actual pages work or not, has nothing
to do with it.

$ curl m.thenextweb.com

<!DOCTYPE html>
<html lang="en">
<head>
<meta charset="UTF-8" />

<meta name="apple-mobile-web-app-capable" content="yes" />
<meta name="format-detection" content="telephone=no" />
<meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, minimum-scale=1.0,
maximum-scale=1.0" />

<link rel="apple-touch-icon" />
<link rel="apple-touch-startup-image" />

<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="http://cdn.onswipe.com/
reader/core/onswipe-pub/css/onswipe-pub.css"/>

<!-- TODO: should have a fallback if google cdn fails and serve our
own copy of jquery -->
<script src="https://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/1.6.1/
jquery.min.js"></script>

<!-- vendor javascript TODO: concatenate and use minified version -->
<script src="http://cdn.onswipe.com/reader/core/onswipe-pub/js/vendor/
underscore-min.js" type="text/javascript" charset="utf-8"></script>
<script src="http://cdn.onswipe.com/reader/core/onswipe-pub/js/vendor/
backbone.js" type="text/javascript" charset="utf-8"></script>
<script src="http://cdn.onswipe.com/reader/core/onswipe-pub/js/vendor/
mustache.js" type="text/javascript" charset="utf-8"></script>
<script src="http://cdn.onswipe.com/reader/core/onswipe-pub/js/vendor/
pretty.js"></script>
<script src="http://cdn.onswipe.com/reader/core/onswipe-pub/js/vendor/
jquery-tappableLive.js" type="text/javascript" charset="utf-8"></
script>
<script src="http://cdn.onswipe.com/reader/core/onswipe-pub/js/vendor/
jquery-livequery.js" type="text/javascript" charset="utf-8"></script>
<script src="http://cdn.onswipe.com/reader/core/onswipe-pub/js/vendor/
jquery-cookie.js" type="text/javascript" charset="utf-8"></script>
<script src="http://cdn.onswipe.com/reader/core/onswipe-pub/js/vendor/
dateformat.js" type="text/javascript" charset="utf-8"></script>

<!-- the new framework -->
<script src="http://cdn.onswipe.com/reader/core/onswipe-pub/js/onswipe-
pub.js"></script>

<!-- swipecore -->
<script src="http://cdn.onswipe.com/reader/core/sc-assets/js/
swipecore.js"></script>
<script src="http://cdn.onswipe.com/reader/core/sc-assets/js/
swipeable.js"></script>
<script src="http://cdn.onswipe.com/reader/core/sc-assets/js/
swipecore.paginator.js"></script>
<script src="http://cdn.onswipe.com/reader/core/sc-assets/js/
swipecore.peel.js"></script>
<script src="http://cdn.onswipe.com/reader/core/sc-assets/js/
swipecore.flip.js"></script>
<script src="http://cdn.onswipe.com/reader/core/sc-assets/js/
swipecore.lift.js"></script>
<script src="http://cdn.onswipe.com/reader/core/sc-assets/js/
pinchable.js"></script>

<script type="text/javascript">var _sf_startpt=(new Date()).getTime()</
script>

</head>

<body>

<div id="clipping">

...

$ curl thenextweb.com

<!DOCTYPE html>
<html dir="ltr" lang="en-US" xmlns:fb="http://www.facebook.com/2008/
fbml">
<head>
    <meta charset="UTF-8" />
    <title>The Next Web - International technology news, business
&amp; culture.</title>

    <meta name="language" content="en_US" />
    <meta http-equiv="content-language" content="en_US" />

    <meta name="generator" content="WordPress 3.0.5" />
    <meta name="apple-mobile-web-app-capable" content="yes" />
    <meta name="apple-mobile-web-app-status-bar-style"
content="black" />
    <meta name="readability-verification"
content="gg98CaM5YewFSAnFdCqrXVhu7AvvbXqSaC8QJtt90" />


    <script type="text/javascript">
    var $_CONFIG = {
        'site_url': 'http://thenextweb.com',
        'theme_url': 'http://thenextweb.com/wp-content/themes/tnw_5',
        'current_url': '/'
    };
    </script>


    <link rel="alternate" type="application/rss+xml" title="TNW
Network All Stories RSS Feed" href="http://feeds2.feedburner.com/
thenextweb" />
    <link rel="alternate" type="application/rss+xml" title="TNW
Network Top Stories RSS Feed" href="http://feeds2.feedburner.com/
thenextwebtopstories" />

    <link rel="shortcut icon" href="http://thenextweb.com/wp-content/
themes/tnw_5/favicon.png"/>
    <link rel="apple-touch-icon" href="http://thenextweb.com/wp-
content/themes/tnw_5/images/apple-touch-icon.png"/>
    <link rel="apple-touch-startup-image" href="http://thenextweb.com/
wp-content/themes/tnw_5/images/apple-startup-screen.png">

    <link rel="me" type="text/html" href="http://google.com/profiles/
thenextweb"/>
    <link rel="pingback" href="http://thenextweb.com/xmlrpc.php" />
    <link rel="EditURI" type="application/rsd+xml" title="RSD"
href="http://thenextweb.com/xmlrpc.php?rsd" />
    <link rel="wlwmanifest" type="application/wlwmanifest+xml"
href="http://thenextweb.com/wp-includes/wlwmanifest.xml" />
    <link rel='index' title='The Next Web' href='http://
thenextweb.com/' />

    <!-- Onswipe -->
    <script type="text/javascript" src="http://cdn.onswipe.com/synapse/
on.js?usr=thenextweb&phone=1" id="onswipe_synapse"></script>

    <link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" media="all" href="http://
thenextweb.com/wp-content/themes/tnw_5/stylesheets/general.css?
version=7" />
    <!-- Fancybox -->
    <link rel="stylesheet" href="http://thenextweb.com/wp-content/
themes/tnw_5/stylesheets/jquery.fancybox.css?v=1.3.2" type="text/css"
media="screen" title="Fancybox css" charset="utf-8">
    <!-- Buddypress -->
    <link rel="stylesheet" href="http://thenextweb.com/wp-content/
themes/tnw_5/stylesheets/buddypress.css?v=100" type="text/css"
media="all" charset="utf-8">
    <script src="http://thenextweb.com/wp-content/themes/tnw_5/
javascripts/jquery.min.js" type="text/javascript" charset="utf-8"></
script>
    <script src="http://thenextweb.com/wp-content/themes/tnw_5/
javascripts/scripts.js?version=106" type="text/javascript"
charset="utf-8"></script>
    <!-- Buddypress -->
    <script src="http://thenextweb.com/wp-content/themes/tnw_5/
javascripts/buddypress.js" type="text/javascript" charset="utf-8"></
script>
    <!-- Fancybox -->
    <script src="http://thenextweb.com/wp-content/themes/tnw_5/
javascripts/jquery.fancybox.js?v=1.3.2-2" type="text/javascript"
charset="utf-8"></script>

    <!-- Badgeville -->
    <script src="http://api.badgeville.com/v2/badgeville.js?
key=dGhlbmV4dHdlYkBiYWRnZXZpbGxlLmNvbQ==" type="text/javascript"
charset="utf-8"></script>


    <!-- wp_head -->
<link rel='stylesheet' id='livefyre-css'  href='http://
thenextweb.fyre.co/wjs/v1.0/css/livefyre_embed.css?ver=3.0.5'
type='text/css' media='all' />
<link rel='stylesheet' id='thickbox-css'  href='http://thenextweb.com/
wp-includes/js/thickbox/thickbox.css?ver=20090514' type='text/css'
media='all' />
<script type="text/javascript">var ajaxurl = "http://thenextweb.com/wp-
load.php";</script>
<!--##LivefyreHeadTestOK##--><!--##LivefyreHeadTestBlognameOK##--
><script type="text/javascript" src="http://thenextweb.fyre.co/wjs/
javascripts/ncomments.js#bn=284535"></script>
	<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast WordPress SEO plugin
v0.2.3.2 - http://yoast.com/wordpress/seo/ -->
	<meta name='description' content='TNW is a consumer tech blog &amp;
resource. If it’s worth hearing about, you’ll hear it from
us....first.'/>
	<link rel="canonical" href="http://thenextweb.com/" />
	<!-- / Yoast WordPress SEO plugin. -->

	<meta property="fb:app_id" content="112846855414712"/>
    <meta property="og:site_name" content="The Next Web"/>


    <meta property="og:type" content="blog" />

	        <meta property="og:title" content="The Next Web &raquo;
International technology news, business &amp; culture." />

	        <meta property="og:url" content="http://thenextweb.com/media/
2011/07/16/will-licensing-issues-spoil-the-online-media-party-
forever/"/>
                	<meta property="og:image" content="http://
thenextweb.com/files/2008/10/hobnox-audiotool.jpg" />
        	<style type="text/css" media="all">
/* <![CDATA[ */
@import url("http://thenextweb.com/wp-content/plugins/wp-table-
reloaded/css/plugin.css?ver=1.8");
@import url("http://thenextweb.com/wp-content/plugins/wp-table-
reloaded/css/datatables.css?ver=1.8");
/* ]]> */
</style>    <meta property="fb:admins" content="zeemkane"/>
    <meta property="og:description" content="International technology
news, business &amp; culture."/>
    <meta name="viewport" content="width = device-width, initial-scale
= 0.72" />
	<script type="text/javascript"> jQuery(document).ready( function()
{ jQuery("a.confirm").click( function() { if ( confirm( 'Are you
sure?' ) ) return true; else return false; }); });</script>
</head>

<body class="home-page">

    <div class="topmenu">
        <div class="wrapper">
            <div class="float-r account-placeholder">

...

--
Jorge.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4234

Jorge <jorge%jorgechamorro.com@gtempaccount.com> writes:

> On 16 jul, 02:14, Ben Bacarisse <ben.use...@bsb.me.uk> wrote:
>>
>> It was a fail for two reasons: (1) The separation was not done properly in
>> that the desktop version kept reverting to the iPad version on a link
>> clink.  (2) Doing it well means getting both sites right and that was
>> not done.
>
> Well separated because m.thenextweb.com is a totally different thing
> than thenextweb.com. Whether the actual pages work or not, has nothing
> to do with it.

Agreed.  The flaw in the separation is not related to the fact that one
version of the site does not work.  Of course, it could be that what I
see as failed separation is deliberate -- I can't be sure what the
intent was.

The bottom line for me is that I can't see what is it that is being
touted as good about this site?  It seems to be broken for people
visiting with certain devices, and that can't be considered a success
can it?  I was not weighing into the argument about whether serving
device-specific content is the right thing to do, I was commenting on
what appeared to be a suggestion of how to do it well.

<snip>
-- 
Ben.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4257

On Jul 17, 8:07 am, Ben Bacarisse <ben.use...@bsb.me.uk> wrote:
> Jorge <jorge%jorgechamorro....@gtempaccount.com> writes:
> > On 16 jul, 02:14, Ben Bacarisse <ben.use...@bsb.me.uk> wrote:
>
> >> It was a fail for two reasons: (1) The separation was not done properly in
> >> that the desktop version kept reverting to the iPad version on a link
> >> clink.  (2) Doing it well means getting both sites right and that was
> >> not done.
>
> > Well separated because m.thenextweb.com is a totally different thing
> > than thenextweb.com. Whether the actual pages work or not, has nothing
> > to do with it.
>
> Agreed.  The flaw in the separation is not related to the fact that one
> version of the site does not work.  Of course, it could be that what I
> see as failed separation is deliberate -- I can't be sure what the
> intent was.
>
> The bottom line for me is that I can't see what is it that is being
> touted as good about this site?  It seems to be broken for people
> visiting with certain devices, and that can't be considered a success
> can it?  I was not weighing into the argument about whether serving
> device-specific content is the right thing to do, I was commenting on
> what appeared to be a suggestion of how to do it well.

It may well be that had they not divided their resources, they might
have been able to produce one good site rather than two awful ones
(though I think there is also an iPod Touch version too).

In any case, the fact that people make different versions of a site
does not, of itself, make it a good idea. And where different versions
are indicated (or at least, different UIs) to meet user requirements,
it does not seem appropriate to force a particular version of a site
onto a user because of the device they happen to be using, even if you
can determine that reliably.


--
Rob

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.javascript

csiph-web