Comments on: Let the mobile web learn from and not repeat the mistakes of desktop development http://www.iheni.com/mobile-desktop-development/ Sat, 13 Mar 2010 14:52:21 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: Vero http://www.iheni.com/mobile-desktop-development/comment-page-1/#comment-6675 Vero Mon, 23 Feb 2009 13:03:11 +0000 http://www.iheni.com/?p=863#comment-6675 Those with corporate handsets and with mobile internet subscriptions will overlook the fact that accessing full page versions on a mobile is VERY VERY expensive. Example: Just accessing The Guardian page on my O2 contract will cost me £3.9 (this is just the home page, at £3 per 1MB, the page being 1.3MB), whereas accessing a mobile optimised BBC page - just 6p (BBC pages are about 20KB). The Guardian is not the only example. An average 2009 web page is about 400KB, and growing. We've been spoilt by fast, limitless connections on computers. But if we ever want the mobile internet to take up, size, pricing and bandwidth MUST be considered. Vero Those with corporate handsets and with mobile internet subscriptions will overlook the fact that accessing full page versions on a mobile is VERY VERY expensive.

Example:
Just accessing The Guardian page on my O2 contract will cost me £3.9 (this is just the home page, at £3 per 1MB, the page being 1.3MB), whereas accessing a mobile optimised BBC page – just 6p (BBC pages are about 20KB).

The Guardian is not the only example. An average 2009 web page is about 400KB, and growing. We’ve been spoilt by fast, limitless connections on computers. But if we ever want the mobile internet to take up, size, pricing and bandwidth MUST be considered.

Vero

]]> By: Alex Kerr http://www.iheni.com/mobile-desktop-development/comment-page-1/#comment-5800 Alex Kerr Wed, 18 Feb 2009 12:12:23 +0000 http://www.iheni.com/?p=863#comment-5800 That's fine if you want one web, but you can't get around these facts, even with the excellent Opera Mini: 1.) Scrolling around a desktop version of a site to try and find what you want is a major pain. You can't engineer this away no matter how slick, clever and smooth your scrolling or tabbed jumps. 2.) Hunting around in the site structure of a desktop-oriented site for things you want is a major pain. One of the key points about mobile versions is the site structure is heavily streamlined. 3.) It will always take longer for Opera (or a full on device browser, e.g. S60 browser on Nokias) to download and process a desktop site than it will for a light, streamlined mobile version of the site. I don't care if the originating site, or Opera proxies (which is what Mini is), or the evil transcoders :), or the full on-device browser, provide a lightweight site with streamlined navigation whose pages get on to my device as fast as a tuned mobile page, but something somewhere in the chain needs to be providing this. Yes, mobile users should not have a mobile site imposed forcibly on them, but neither should they have a desktop site imposed forcibly on them, via Mini or a transcoder. Users should choose (links to either version at the top of each page are not difficult to implement). Opera Mini, and other transcoding proxies are not the future and never can be, especially if they break HTTPS as they are currently lobbying hard at W3C to do (VERY bad). User choice is the future. That’s fine if you want one web, but you can’t get around these facts, even with the excellent Opera Mini:

1.) Scrolling around a desktop version of a site to try and find what you want is a major pain. You can’t engineer this away no matter how slick, clever and smooth your scrolling or tabbed jumps.

2.) Hunting around in the site structure of a desktop-oriented site for things you want is a major pain. One of the key points about mobile versions is the site structure is heavily streamlined.

3.) It will always take longer for Opera (or a full on device browser, e.g. S60 browser on Nokias) to download and process a desktop site than it will for a light, streamlined mobile version of the site.

I don’t care if the originating site, or Opera proxies (which is what Mini is), or the evil transcoders :) , or the full on-device browser, provide a lightweight site with streamlined navigation whose pages get on to my device as fast as a tuned mobile page, but something somewhere in the chain needs to be providing this.

Yes, mobile users should not have a mobile site imposed forcibly on them, but neither should they have a desktop site imposed forcibly on them, via Mini or a transcoder. Users should choose (links to either version at the top of each page are not difficult to implement).

Opera Mini, and other transcoding proxies are not the future and never can be, especially if they break HTTPS as they are currently lobbying hard at W3C to do (VERY bad). User choice is the future.

]]> By: Ben Millard http://www.iheni.com/mobile-desktop-development/comment-page-1/#comment-5755 Ben Millard Wed, 18 Feb 2009 07:38:39 +0000 http://www.iheni.com/?p=863#comment-5755 I've blogged my thoughts about this: <a href="http://projectcerbera.com/blog/2009/02/one-web" rel="nofollow">One Web Works Fine</a>. <a href="http://www.accessifyforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=13099" rel="nofollow">Mobile-friendly websites and accessibility</a> is a topic that's just started on Accessify Forum, too. I’ve blogged my thoughts about this: One Web Works Fine.

Mobile-friendly websites and accessibility is a topic that’s just started on Accessify Forum, too.

]]> By: Nick Hine http://www.iheni.com/mobile-desktop-development/comment-page-1/#comment-5687 Nick Hine Tue, 17 Feb 2009 22:52:28 +0000 http://www.iheni.com/?p=863#comment-5687 Actually, we DON'T have standards to have one web, we have standards to remove exclusion from information. So, on a mobile device the low graphics mobile web sites from the BBC for mobile browsers are preferable to the full pages rendered by Opera that then have to be scrolled endlessly. Opera on the Wii is frustrating and ultimately unusable if you don't have a wide screen TV. If mobile versions of sites are bad copies of the full sites, that too MAY be unacceptable, but perhaps only if information is being lost (as conveyed by a picture or video). So, the goal is one web of information, not one web of web sites. Refusing to make 2 sites of valuable information just sounds like laziness to me. If we are serious about accessibility, let's not get stalled on this principle, but let's make information accessible. Actually, we DON’T have standards to have one web, we have standards to remove exclusion from information. So, on a mobile device the low graphics mobile web sites from the BBC for mobile browsers are preferable to the full pages rendered by Opera that then have to be scrolled endlessly. Opera on the Wii is frustrating and ultimately unusable if you don’t have a wide screen TV. If mobile versions of sites are bad copies of the full sites, that too MAY be unacceptable, but perhaps only if information is being lost (as conveyed by a picture or video).

So, the goal is one web of information, not one web of web sites. Refusing to make 2 sites of valuable information just sounds like laziness to me. If we are serious about accessibility, let’s not get stalled on this principle, but let’s make information accessible.

]]>