To Be Responsive Or To Opt For Mobile Websites-aptana studio

Web-Design There has been ongoing battle for the mobile web. We can safely conclude by saying by a separate mobile web, we mean is the mobile device that is .pletely different to necessitate the building of websites. We can also state that the mobile web is the same Web that we access using variety of devices. Usability pundit, Jakob Nielsen, .mented that there is the need for separate mobile websites. He published his opinion on the mobile usability guidelines. He stated, Good mobile user experience requires a different design than whats needed to satisfy desktop users. Two designs, two sites, and cross-linking to make it all work. Most people deny this as people think that they dont need two different websites to view the same content from different devices. The most important thing to know is that the viewer of the website would never know what content they actually want. When Jakob Neilson mentioned that mobile websites should eliminate features that are not encore for its usage, he forgot this basic fact. A Miami Web Design .pany stated that the mobile website should not be different from the main version. Neilson had said that separate mobile websites should be build if the owner wants to offer a different experience to the users. Building separate mobile website is often a cheaper option, especially when there is time and budgetary constraints. There may be some factors because of which a separate website needs to be build. Recreating the entire website with responsive base requires auditing content. There are production risks making the entire process a colossal job. For example, if the website is built on CMS, it is often best to leave the desktop version the way it is. A parallel URL structure can be construed with the CMS that can be made to display information on a simplified mobile website template. The problem with this approach is the fact that the usability pundit had asked the mobile users to .e to the original website URL, that is then auto directed to the mobile version. The problem, although lies in the inability to detect mobile browsers. The developers attempt to ac.plish this with browser sniffing, and yet this is not fool proof as browsers can spoof this. It is a flawed concept. Other than this, there are hundreds of UA strings that the detection script needs to be aware of so that the audience is sent to the accurate page. This makes it necessary to continuously check and update the UA scripts. Josh Clark points out that there have been a growing number of people who accesses the web through the mobile device. There have been an increased number of people numbering about 25 million who browse the web on small screens. Thus, we could safely conclude that we cannot serve such a huge audience with a stripped down experience and enforce them to a desktop layout on the small screen. The number of people who are using the Smartphones is high even in the emerging economies. The Miami Web Design .pany would agree with Jakob Neilson as he says that measured usability is higher in mobile websites than for other sites. This however, does not mean that we should continue to make specialized mobile websites. More than separate websites, it is important to make special screen reader websites. Many full websites do not work on the devices. The desktop websites often lose their focus simply because they have too much room. The mobile developers get its mantra right by keeping it minimal, functional and sites that enable .pletion of a task. Yet this does not mean that there is the need to construct a separate mobile website, and if the normal version of the website is not simple, operational or minimal, it is time to rethink about the whole version. Once this has been ac.plished, the website would be everywhere irrespective of the device. The next flawed logic was found in Neilsons dismissal of feature phones. The assertion of not supporting features phones because they actually see less traffic is analogous to the business owner. It is like ignoring a section of the audience just to acclaim that the people using features phones would not visit the website. The W3C .pliancy for the mobile websites states that, one Web would be safely concluded as making a reasonable website that is accessible to the audience from any device. It does not mean to offer the same information represented in the same exact manner. Different factors, like the device capability, bandwidth issues and mobile networking all affects the representation. Some devices have been found to be more .patible to display particular information than others are. This simply proves the fact that there may be cases when the mobile-based websites would be more adept for user satisfaction. However, for a future proof solution, it is easier to develop a website that would adapt to different devices with Media Queries, technologies and viewport, and which is often termed as Responsive website design. The .bination of all these elements along with progressive enhancement would enable the content to be viewable from any device. These websites would be able to access the device APIs and other integrated features. About the Author: 相关的主题文章: