Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Just because I have a vertical screen doesn’t mean I’m on a phone

shkspr.mobi

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 399 posts

Re: Just because I have a vertical screen doesn’t mean I’m on a phone

#91

Post by tyingq »

Wowfunhappy wrote: post #82
tyingq wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The example of https://www.just-eat.co.uk/ bailing out to a hamburger menu at 768px, just to deal with 5 navigation options is a bit much.

As it happens though, with the navigation design they chose, the entries wouldn't fit at that width. They certainly could have added an extra breakpoint where the navigation becomes smaller before bailing to a hamburger, but of course that does add complexity.

I suppose, but "Deliver with Just Eat" is a pretty long, and an overall odd choice for a top menu item. Wasn't clear to me that it meant "drive for us". And that's what's eating the width.

Re: Just because I have a vertical screen doesn’t mean I’m on a phone

#92

Post by alexiaya »

superkuh wrote: post #85

In the past I'd respond: just because I have javascript disabled doesn’t mean I’m on a phone. But unfortunately developers have dropped supporting HTML completely for even older cell phones. There's no more mobile.twitter.com that serves HTML for example.

If you set your user agent to Googlebot, you can still access the legacy desktop site, but only when logged out.

Re: Just because I have a vertical screen doesn’t mean I’m on a phone

#93

Post by nobleach »

dahfizz wrote: post #59
timw4mail wrote: post #15

The real problem is that designing for different screen sizes, especially with responsive design, is very difficult. For my personal projects, screen size is the factor used to determine layout. Mobile/tablet/laptop/desktop is irrelevant. My goal with smaller viewports is to make the layout as similar as possible, without the user having to scroll horizontally. Because I don't want to change the layout too much, I do…

The real real problem is that so many sites overcomplicate their design. HN works beautifully on any window / screen size.

Sure. Now let's say you're shopping for a brand new rug for your living room. Are you going to buy it from a site the looks like HackerNews? If so, I'd venture to say you're in the minority. A used rug from Craigslist, perhaps, but a brand new rug costing hundreds, you're going to want a site that looks VERY professional.

Re: Just because I have a vertical screen doesn’t mean I’m on a phone

#94

Post by MisterBastahrd »

If a client asks for it, I'll do it. Otherwise the use case for people with vertically oriented non-phone screens is so tiny that it isn't worth the effort. What are we realistically talking about here? One in twenty thousand, if that?

Re: Just because I have a vertical screen doesn’t mean I’m on a phone

#95

Post by fasdf1122 »

timw4mail wrote: post #15

The real problem is that designing for different screen sizes, especially with responsive design, is very difficult. For my personal projects, screen size is the factor used to determine layout. Mobile/tablet/laptop/desktop is irrelevant. My goal with smaller viewports is to make the layout as similar as possible, without the user having to scroll horizontally. Because I don't want to change the layout too much, I do…

For my own ventures, I always use a fixed width layout. Saves an almost infinite amount of time, tricky bugs, and therefore a lot of $. Designers produce designs and you just take the pixel dimensions it always looks good. Done.

OTOH, when clients tell me they want responsive design - no problem! It's job security, and I bill by the hour ;)

Re: Just because I have a vertical screen doesn’t mean I’m on a phone

#96

Post by g3e0 »

I feel like I must be missing something, because I don't understand this author's point at all.

"Lots of websites think “Vertical Screen == Mobile User”!" No, they don't - They think a 720px wide screen is a tablet user, which is probably a fair assumption.

I could equally write "Just because I browse zoomed in 500% doesn't mean I'm on a mobile"

When you zoom in, things get bigger, so fewer of them will fit on the screen... You have a choice between horizontal scrolling, or the website showing you the version of itself designed for smaller viewports.

Looking at the "How it should render" screens - I just checked the Guardian site, and that is exactly how the website looks at 1080px wide. The author admits that because of their zoom solution they are running at an effective width of 720px, so maybe just.. don't do that??

The proposed solution doesn't seem to solve anything, because physical size of the screen isn't the full story, it also depends on how far away from the screen the user is - which the browser can never know.

Re: Just because I have a vertical screen doesn’t mean I’m on a phone

#97

Post by jefftk »

nobleach wrote: post #89
jefftk wrote: post #48

Sites are not detecting a portrait screen and deciding that they're displaying on a phone. Someone who switches their monitor to portrait, or resizes a window to be taller than it is wide, is still going to get the desktop view. In this case the author is scaling their resolution, and so their browser is presenting itself to sites as 720px wide. Sites see that and show a layout optimized for a screen of that width. T…

Yes, and webdevs have been trying for over 10 years now to figure out how to get this right. Has no one just stopped to consider having a browser send a `prefersMobileView` or `viewport:phone` or anything like that? I can remember back a few years ago, an iPhone 6+, turned sideways could get a desktop view on some sites... simply because it met the requirements set by the author. Now, the author's assumptions were wr…

Mobile vs Desktop is not a clean division: screens run the full range of widths. Instead, developers should:

* Lay out content based on the viewport width, in CSS pixels.

* Use larger tap targets for coarse pointers (https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/CSS/@media/poin...).

Re: Just because I have a vertical screen doesn’t mean I’m on a phone

#98

Post by Robotbeat »

stronglikedan wrote: post #84
sillysaurusx wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This doesn't address the author's central argument, which is that websites need an effortless way of letting fonts become bigger without affecting the entire layout. I've wanted it too. I don't really care if some text gets cut off on headers and looks weird, I just want to read stuff from the comfort of my bed with my laptop a few feet away.

I love that Chrome on Android lets me zoom into any content on any site, regardless of how bad the devs borked the UX. (Yes, devs, if you don't allow me to zoom using the browser's built-in capabilities, you have borked the UX, and should be ashamed of yourselves.)

I didn’t know this! And inability to do this is a huge pet peeve (as well as not being able to zoom OUT and get a desktop-like view on my phone). Does this work on any browser for iPhone?

Re: Just because I have a vertical screen doesn’t mean I’m on a phone

#100

Post by jefftk »

ur-whale wrote: post #86
jefftk wrote: post #48

Sites are not detecting a portrait screen and deciding that they're displaying on a phone. Someone who switches their monitor to portrait, or resizes a window to be taller than it is wide, is still going to get the desktop view. In this case the author is scaling their resolution, and so their browser is presenting itself to sites as 720px wide. Sites see that and show a layout optimized for a screen of that width. T…

>Someone who switches their monitor to portrait, or resizes a window to be taller than it is wide, is still going to get the desktop view. My experience has been the exact opposite of what you're saying. And the result is, 90% of the time, a site that goes from usable to unusable.

What viewport width are you providing in that case?
Post reply on HN