231–240 of 399 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One of the original selling points of the iPod touch/iPhone was that it could display full desktop websites...
Fair, although back at the time they came out it meant something different. Mobile-optimized websites in 2008 were horrible, stripped-down things.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The real real problem is that so many sites overcomplicate their design. HN works beautifully on any window / screen size.
Lolno. I have to make Firefox take only half the screen, otherwise HN will render wiiide lines with text. I cannot read lines with >200 characters, then I miss the mark when jumping to the next line when it's multiple lines in a paragraph. HN is also the only site I have zoomed in on desktop, as the font is unreadably small on high dpi devices. And on mobile I find it impossible to hit the upvote arrow.
Or random blog sites that become a narrow column of text and a *huge* amount of whitespace on either side.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What viewport width are you providing in that case?
I typically go from width=1920 x height=1080 (or larger but with similar aspect ratio) to width=949 x height=1028 On many sites, this trigger the appearance of the dreaded hamburger menu.
I wish for once that requesting “Desktop version” on my phone would actually give me a desktop view, not the same exact mobile view. Sizing based on viewport (a “responsive design” principle that I hate) gives me hamburgerized unusable mess. I want to be able to zoom out to see the same page features as I would see on desktop. A lot of websites USED to work this way on ios Safari before “responsive design” became a t…
One of the things "Request desktop site" is supposed to do is report a larger effective viewport. For a responsive site, that should switch it to a desktop view. Does iOS Safari not do that?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, I still very often get "here is the desktop design, here is the mobile design". Depending on who is developing the designs depends how that's going to translate. I have all the time in the world for developers that reflow the page and remove/adjust elements at different breakpoints (based on the design) between 'desktop' and 'mobile' so the experience is good for everyone. Sadly, most people don't bother.
I believe true webdesigners are in decline. You have lots of people who do this as a side gig after reading a few tutorials. In a way that’s a nice compliment for the accessibility of the tech, but not accessibility for the end user. Same with “We only tested this on Chrome.” of sites/apps, of which are there are many, as I can attest, as I never use Chrome.
In decline from when? Picking it up after reading a few tutorials has always been a common way to get into web work, and if anything I feel like it's been getting more professionalized over the last twenty years.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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... ).
> Lay out content based on the viewport width, in CSS pixels. This is wrong because the viewport width is not the same as the monitor width or the DPI: especially on big monitors running the browser fullscreen is very hard to use (my browser rarely exceeds more than ~50% width on a 2560x1440 monitor and even when i use a 1366x768 monitor - which btw is at 22", not some tiny laptop one - i very rarely use it maximized…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The real real problem is that so many sites overcomplicate their design. HN works beautifully on any window / screen size.
And yet quotes don't wrap to any specific size, so you end up with an awful horizontal scroll bar. There is no way to format your text, even stuff that's available since MS Word 1.0, such as bold or italic. Even science papers have formatting so I don't buy the "overuse of styles" BS. There is no way to have avatars or some other ways to distinguish users (or mods!) to make this place feel more like a community in re…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This should result in the website knowing that the screen is 7" inches (dots-per-inch / dots = inches) across and setting the style for small devices.
This requires the use of JavaScript to style a website.
Users with NoScript will just have to live without some functionality. I'm sure they are used to that already, since a large fraction of websites use JS for styling. (I use NoScript)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Fair, although back at the time they came out it meant something different. Mobile-optimized websites in 2008 were horrible, stripped-down things.
Isn't that still true in 2021? I haven't been particularly fond of the mobile view of most sites I come across. I force desktop-view on my phone fairly frequently just to get at features/pages I want.