Will responsive websites lead to a web design boom?

[Baz Watkins]

Hi all,

With the advent of fully responsive websites, do you think this could lead to another boom in web design and development as businesses scramble to get their websites ready to meet the new ways people are accessing the internet?

I can't help thinking that there will be a tipping point where everyone (i.e. average joe) suddenly decides they have to have a responsive website.

Thanks, B.

 

[Uwe (Invoiceberry)]

Hi,

I think a lot of people are changing their web browsing behaviour. The reason being the rise of social networks such as Facebook, the app culture and new devices such as the IPad and other tablet devices.

More and more software is moving online and laptops as well as computers will also need to take this change in behaviour into account. The best example is probably the Google Chrome laptop which is trying to move your entire computer experience into the cloud/online.

This will ultimately also be reflected in website and business owners looking for new web designs which take these changes into account.

Best,
Uwe

 

[bdw]

Personally I am dreading it and I think I will pull the plug on my business when it gets to this stage. I have a smart phone but to me the browsing experience on it is dreadful compared to my PC or laptop. Unfortunately all the signs are that I am soon to be in the minority.

Anyone want to buy a web design business?

.

 

[IH-Rameen]

Personally I am dreading it and I think I will pull the plug on my business when it gets to this stage. I have a smart phone but to me the browsing experience on it is dreadful compared to my PC or laptop. Unfortunately all the signs are that I am soon to be in the minority.

Anyone want to buy a web design business?

.

I don't think it will ever reach such a stage. Granted things are evolving, I still see huge potential for the traditional way we browse and use the internet. The way we used the internet 10-15 years ago is the same way we use it now. Not much has really changed.

Due to faster home connections and 3G, it has in my opinion, only slightly evolved to include video streaming, VoIP and social networking. Apart from those 3, things are still pretty much the same.

Web design will continue change with peoples tastes. If you look back at websites back from 15 years ago, it makes you cringe! But, it's possible 20 years from now, websites we think look beautiful today, will make us cringe in the future.

 

[bdw]

To me there is no fun in using the Internet on a phone. It has its uses but on most occasions isn't it a bit like producing a glossy mag with 3.5" high pages.

.

 

[KM-Tiger]

To me there is no fun in using the Internet on a phone.
.

Depends how you use it.

Using a browser on a phone agreed is dreadful, but using an app that presents the same information in a different way can be very good. In fact with one app that I use for business, essential.

 

[bdw]

As I say it has its uses but browsing is not one of them and that is what the Internet is all about. I have friends whose only experience on the Internet has been with phones. They don't have any concept of how much more rewarding it is on a larger screen.

.

 

[terryuk]

Hi all,

With the advent of fully responsive websites, do you think this could lead to another boom in web design and development as businesses scramble to get their websites ready to meet the new ways people are accessing the internet?

I can't help thinking that there will be a tipping point where everyone (i.e. average joe) suddenly decides they have to have a responsive website.

Thanks, B.

I doubt it although a few people will no doubt be pushing the sales of it, or already should I say.

I guess there are still thousands of businesses without a website, so maybe in another few years when mobile payments are fully go but even then it's just a new technology some follow some don't.

The iPhone payment technology would make a killing in the ecommerce world, you don't even have to enter your CC details in

 

[FreelanceSoftwareDeveloper]

I know a number of people who only have internet access via their phone but I see a fairly equal divide between those who like mobile sites and those who are perfectly capable of navigating a 'full-size' site and don't want to lose features or have things move around. I guess the latter group tend to be those who have both phone and desktop access.

I agree with bdw that it's a shame things are going this way, it will be as bad for web design/development as mp3 is for music. I'd also likely move away from web programming if it heads down this route, go back to low level programming or concentrate on business applications.

 

[cmcp]

Agencies across the country are cashing in on responsive.

It's a shame so many folk don't actually get it. I see many responsive sites that are heavier in page weight than the ones they replace. It's an absolute joke.

 

[cmcp]

PS, responsive design is incredible, when done properly... even though it's only really fluid widths, optimised content and logical breakpoints.

 

[MASSEY]

No. There are already responsive wordpress themes

 

[bdw]

What we need are responsive devices. They should design the bloody things so that they can use the Internet, not the other way round.

.

 

[terryuk]

What we need are responsive devices. They should design the bloody things so that they can use the Internet, not the other way round.

.

I take it you don't own an iPhone..

They use the Internet that much it compliments your 3G bill at the end of the month. Day light robbery :redface:

 

[cmcp]

What we need are responsive devices. They should design the bloody things so that they can use the Internet, not the other way round.

.

What do you mean responsive devices? What is the other way around?

Responsive design is the approach that allows any viewport regardless of device, to access the internet.

In the future design has to be flexible to allow any sort of device to consume the content how it chooses. Fragmentation is only going to get worse, with screens getting smaller as well as larger.

 

[SuffolkDesigns]

I am biased as I sell a CMS for mobile websites, but I think in many cases a regular site & a mobile site is more beneficial than a responsive site as the mobile site content can be written specifically for mobile browsers and should be a lot simpler (for example: this is us, what we do, call us, find us)

From a sales perspective it is easier to sell a client that already has regular website a mobile site than a total redesign for a responsive site.

 

[cmcp]

But 80+% of users use mobiles and tablets in the home.

You can't assume you know the context which a mobile or tablet device is being used.

To these users, by giving them trimmed down content you are preventing them from seeing all your information.

What you should be doing through the responsive design process, is auditing your content and only delivering the most succinct, potent content to everyone.

What is the use in delivering an optimised experience to only mobile users? What about desktop users? Is the rest of the un-optimised content crap? 9 times out of 10, yes.

 

[Esk247]

As I say it has its uses but browsing is not one of them and that is what the Internet is all about. I have friends whose only experience on the Internet has been with phones. They don't have any concept of how much more rewarding it is on a larger screen.

.

True but then a lot of people are tied to the phone and not the PC. My other half doesn't even use a computer any more since she got her iPhone, she does all her emails on it, orders stuff using Apps for Amazon and eBay. ]

All websites will need to be responsive but my worry is compatibility across many different browsers for certain functions e.g. html/css codes are easy to implement for different browsers but when you get in to higher level coding where data is transferred from one page to the other page to calculate say an insurance quote, then it gets a bit more tricky, especially when you add in that you have to do it for phones AND PCs AND tablets.

 

[cmcp]

but when you get in to higher level coding where data is transferred from one page to the other page to calculate say an insurance quote, then it gets a bit more tricky

That's no more tricky than building a website for a desktop browser. It's just HTTP requests.

especially when you add in that you have to do it for phones AND PCs AND tablets.

That's just the point; you don't have to do it 3 times you only do it once.

 

[Esk247]

That's no more tricky than building a website for a desktop browser. It's just HTTP requests.

So why is everyone having trouble building websites for old I.E. browsers? if it was that easy no web designer would ever complain when they released another I.E version..but they do.

That's just the point; you don't have to do it 3 times you only do it once.

No, you won't be doing it once at all. Because just as you've done it once and got it to work on all current platforms they will release a new browser that won't work in the same way e.g. again look at I.E. it's a pig, I.E. 7 displays websites differently to I.E 8 so when they launch I.E 15 or a completely new browser your responsive design won't work because they will have changed the coding..again..like they always do.

Are you saying you have developed a website that will work on all platforms in to the future without any coding changes?

 

[cmcp]

So why is everyone having trouble building websites for old I.E. browsers? if it was that easy no web designer would ever complain when they released another I.E version..but they do.

Because most web developers that complain about this do not know what they are doing.

No, you won't be doing it once at all. Because just as you've done it once and got it to work on all current platforms they will release a new browser that won't work in the same way e.g. again look at I.E. it's a pig, I.E. 7 displays websites differently to I.E 8 so when they launch I.E 15 or a completely new browser your responsive design won't work because they will have changed the coding..again..like they always do.

I think you'll find that the IE / trident rendering engine is a historical problem. It's gotten better over time. IE9 and 10 is pretty damn good.

With the amount of fragmentation of browsers in the future you have to let go of the idea of pixel perfect across devices. That concept is long gone. Designs have to be flexible so they can adapt to the constraints and capabilities of the device.

Are you saying you have developed a website that will work on all platforms in to the future without any coding changes?

No, but I build websites that are as future proof as possible, using progressive enhancement and semantic standards compliant markup and style.

 

[SuffolkDesigns]

But 80+% of users use mobiles and tablets in the home.

You can't assume you know the context which a mobile or tablet device is being used.

To these users, by giving them trimmed down content you are preventing them from seeing all your information.

That's what a "Click here to view classic site" link is for, it gives users the choice, and is a lot easier for a user to find on a mobile site than a "click here to view mobile site" link is on a regular site.

I always recommend to my mobile website clients to set it so tablet users get the full site

 

[cmcp]

That's what a "Click here to view classic site" link is for, it gives users the choice, and is a lot easier for a user to find on a mobile site than a "click here to view mobile site" link is on a regular site.

I always recommend to my mobile website clients to set it so tablet users get the full site

A number of leading web developers treat "view full site" links as an admission of failure, and I agree.

The benefits of responsive far outweigh a two tier codebase, a two tier URL structure, and a limited mobile experience.

Not to mention, responsive is a recommended approach by both Google and Bing. I wouldn't be changing my approach any time soon.

 

[SuffolkDesigns]

I am not saying that every site should have a dedicated mobile version, I have myself developed responsive sites for clients. It all comes down to the industry the client is in and how they want their site and information displayed to their site users.
To say one way is right and one is wrong is, in my opinion, an admission of failure to understand the clients needs.

Google also has bots spidering mobile sites and listing them higher for users that browse on mobiles.

EDIT: and lets not forget googles recent launch of a dedicated mobile website builder.

 

[cmcp]

I'm comparing the approaches based on examples given by you; a main website with content Vs a mobile website with trimmed down "mobile" content.

I too have build mobile websites, but in the examples given responsive is the obvious choice.

 

[SuffolkDesigns]

I don't think I gave any examples.

but I think in many cases a regular site & a mobile site is more beneficial than a responsive site.

Is the closest I came, and I stand by that comment, that "in many cases" a dedicated mobile site running alongside a regular site is more beneficial than a responsive site.

 

[cmcp]

This part, when you say a two tier content strategy is good for mobile. This part we will never agree on, as people use mobile in all sorts of context.

What are the benefits? (edit, apart from the obvious lighter pageweight)

in many cases a regular site & a mobile site is more beneficial than a responsive site as the mobile site content can be written specifically for mobile browsers and should be a lot simpler (for example: this is us, what we do, call us, find us)

 

[SuffolkDesigns]

This part, when you say a two tier content strategy is good for mobile. This part we will never agree on, as people use mobile in all sorts of context.

What are the benefits?

"in many cases" it is better, (we will have to agree to disagree on many points, but hey! might as well make a decent discussion out of it! )

What are the benefits? It is designed for mobile users. A design that is made for a specific use such as mobiles will always work better and be easier to use/navigate than a large responsive site with lots of content. But there are drawbacks, 2 sites to update etc.
One size fits all is a great thing, but often tailor made is better.
The bottom line is what does the client want?

 

[cmcp]

I'd say often what the client wants is irrelevant. What the users need is how we look at it.

If you're building with a mobile first approach you can solve many UI issues by planning with the mobile in mind.

It's probably worth pointing out the absolute best solution in my opinion is a RESS one (responsive and server side components), that allow JS and images to be switched out depending on device type.

 

[Matt1959]

what is a responsive website exactly? I have trawled the thread but seem none the wiser!!

 

[Chunkford]

One thing I've noticed in a website owners quest for responsive design is the first thing to go is the adverts. Look at http://www.smashingmagazine.com/ which I think is the best example of a responsive design. I could keep making my browser smaller and larger all night

I tend to find it's a bit more an enjoyable experience when the site reduces down so I can use my finger instead of a mouse.
But then I do agree it can be a PITA when i'm on my phone and I can't do certain things as if I was using the site on my laptop.

 

[SuffolkDesigns]

It's probably worth pointing out the absolute best solution in my opinion is a RESS one (responsive and server side components), that allow JS and images to be switched out depending on device type.

I am sure it will go that way, at the moment I don't believe responsive sites are responsive enough.

The mobile sites I have designed often have very similar features to the regular site, just easier to use due to layout, size and content on a mobile device.
The obvious ones are "tap to call" and only 2 taps to get directions from a homepage, 4 taps from homepage to make a restaurant reservation etc, as well as the improved speed from less clutter and cleaner integration with mobile marketing.

 

[cmcp]

what is a responsive website exactly? I have trawled the thread but seem none the wiser!!

One fluid, lightweight website that serves all devices (desktop, mobile, tv) based on set breakpoints in the CSS.

 

[cmcp]

I am sure it will go that way, at the moment I don't believe responsive sites are responsive enough.

The mobile sites I have designed often have very similar features to the regular site, just easier to use due to layout, size and content on a mobile device.
The obvious ones are "tap to call" and only 2 taps to get directions from a homepage, 4 taps from homepage to make a restaurant reservation etc, as well as the improved speed from less clutter and cleaner integration with mobile marketing.

Nothing to stop you achieving that with a mobile first responsive approach, but we'll leave that one be

In fact, a good mobile website can be the first steps towards a good responsive main website. If people are investing in a mobile site, consider expanding it with media queries and switching it to be your main site in the future.

 

[bdw]

I take it you don't own an iPhone.

I have a Samsung Galaxy and I am happy to accept any websites that can be displayed on it for what they are. I understand that the Internet was designed for larger screens and I accept that it will be a long time before all current websites are "responsive". I don't see it as any sort of problem right now.

.

 

[cmcp]

I understand that the Internet was designed for larger screens

Not true, the internet is designed as one web. A source of information that can be accessed from any range of devices no matter what the screen, regardless of ability or disability, and not a two tier system which goes against net neutrality.

There are many quotes by Tim Berners Lee on the matter, here's a more recent one on continued open standards and net neutrality.

 

[bdw]

Not true, the internet is designed as one web.

The Internet was designed when there were no options other than PC monitors so it is very true.

.

 

[cmcp]

The Internet was designed when there were no options other than PC monitors so it is very true.

.

Your assumption that because the internet was conceived when larger screens were around means it was designed for larger screens is fundamentally incorrect, as documented by the early creators of the internet. Screen size was and is irrelevant.

Moving forward publishers will have to understand that their content can be consumed by a number of user agents, apps, large screens small screens; it just has to be structured in a semantic way to work on all.

Gone are the days of best viewed on 1024. Exciting times!

 

[bdw]

Screen size was and is irrelevant.

Your contention is fundamentally incorrect.

.

 

[InternetMarketingPlatinum]

THe be all and end all is that people browse websites on their phones differently to the way that they browse using a desktop/laptop. That's why we design variants of a website for every given medium ..... client's budget permitting of course