Viewing Responsive Website
Responsive Website
|
User: Raf P. 11 years ago
|
|
|
I know it isn't that easy to make a good responsive webbuilder. Moreover, all responsive websites look the same. But I'm afraid this is a must have in the future. Suddenly, everybody wants a responsive website. Unfortunately I'm loosing customers by this. But I believe in the future of EW also. I'm sure EW knows what to do to give his users the right tools. Please, keep them informed. Btw, 1.7 looks very nice and does things very nice. ------------------------------- Kind regards, Raphael Pairoux |
|
|
User: Paul-RAGESW 11 years ago
|
|
|
Quote: But I'm afraid this is a must have in the future. We're working on a unique and powerful responsive system. Quote: Unfortunately I'm loosing customers by this. Why do you think you are losing customers because you don't have a responsive website? Most people who don't build websites have no idea what a responsive website is. The major drawback of a responsive website is that they are large. That means on mobile devices, which is what they are supposed to be used for, you're forcing customers to download more content which is going to produce a slow website. A dedicated mobile site, with only the content needed, will provide the best solution for mobile users who are often on slower connections. Keep that in mind and really think about the benefits and drawbacks of a responsive site vs a dedicated mobile site. I do doubt that you are losing customers because of this, but I am also opened to hearing why you think that or data showing that is the case. We are working on delivering responsive solutions so you have the choice though. But consider what I said above about dedicated mobile websites... Looking forward to your feedback (and anyone else's of course) ------------------------------- Paul EverWeb Developer |
|
|
User: Roddy 11 years ago
|
|
|
From the comments expressed in this forum it seems that some people don't quite understand the difference between a responsive design and a fluid/liquid layout. Responsive designs do not spread out to fill the screen on a computer in the way that an uncontrolled liquid layout does. Why would anybody want a web page that is capable of expanding to over 5000 pixels? As Paul has pointed out, creating a responsive design that works on all devices and computers is complex and usually unsatisfactory. When I was coding responsive sites, none of my clients wanted to replace their conventional website with a responsive one. They wanted a separate mobile design which responded to the varying screen widths of the many mobile devices. With a fully responsive design, most will agree that the best approach is to use the mobile first method where the site is designed for mobile devices and then styles are added as necessary to support computers using modern browsers and on down to legacy ones. These are very complex designs and are best left to those poor souls whose uneducated clients demand it. Creating a mobile only responsive site is much easier but still requires a working knowledge of media queries and a lot of time testing the result at different screen widths. Drag and drop users don't seem to realise that they will lose a lot of design freedom and will definitely have to plan their layouts in advance! To allow flexibility, most responsive templates use a complication system of columns/grids. Using these can be quite mind bending if you don't take the time to understand the math behind them. The future of responsive mobile design is in the use of the new(ish) flexible box model. This is now supported by the latest version of all the major browsers but it will be a long time before it can safely be used on conventional sites. It is however practical to use it for a simple mobile design without having to understand all the tricks it can accomplish. It is more suitable for use on smaller scale layouts such as mobile pages than grids which are more suited to fully responsive designs.. When I was creating mobile designs, flex was in its infancy so was not an option. I decided to create a test page this afternoon to see how it could be utilised simply for a responsive design for mobile only. The result should give an idea of what a basic design involves and how it performs on devices with varying screen widths... http://everwebcodebox.com/flex-css/ This produces a fairly flexible, simple solution without having to have two different styles for the navigation and all the media queries that are required for a full responsive site. ------------------------------- Roddy Website: http://everwebwidgets.com Contact: http://everwebwidgets.com/ewWidgets-home/contact.html NOTE: I am an EverWeb user and NOT affiliated with EverWeb! Any opinions expressed in this forum are my own. |
|
|
User: Raf P. 11 years ago
|
|
|
You guys should not convince me of the importance of a site must be mobile, responsive, static, whatever. The possibility to create a responsive site is NOT my guardian angel. It's just a tool that is not available in EW for the moment. I'm glad to hear EW is working on a unique and powerful responsive system. I'm looking forward. Afterwards, I will determine how I develop the site and I certainly will follow your advice! That advice helped me in the past and will help me in the future!
------------------------------- Kind regards, Raphael Pairoux |
|
|
User: Roddy 11 years ago
|
|
|
I'm not trying to convince anybody of anything! I'm just trying to point out that being able to create a fully responsive website with a drag and drop application is ill advised and impractical. Creating a responsive mobile version is much more realistic. As you know, creating web designs for clients is a different ballgame for designing one for yourself - or a few friends. I got into mobile website design by accident when some of our studio clients asked about it in relation to promoting and selling their recordings. Most musicians realised, way back, that their fans are mainly mobile and this is even more so today. At that time, the only way was to use code so I learned it by doing it. I still get prospective clients knocking on my door because finding designers with the necessary skill set at a reasonable price is not easy. Needless to say I don't do it anymore since I am not involved with audio recording and production full time and it's easy to say no to people you don't know! ------------------------------- Roddy Website: http://everwebwidgets.com Contact: http://everwebwidgets.com/ewWidgets-home/contact.html NOTE: I am an EverWeb user and NOT affiliated with EverWeb! Any opinions expressed in this forum are my own. |
|
|
User: James G. 11 years ago
|
|
|
I might be able to help here. For those wanting Responsive Design for a website; What part(s) of it do you want? I think that is what paul is asking. To have a fully Responsive website is very complicated and as stated not for all. Think about it this way: When we users see a website we like elements of it. We may like how something behaves. Now, let us say in order to change to a fully Responsive Design, it would take 1,000 changes (a random round number). I will answer the question asked by paul like this: What I (and I think others) would like to see is quasi-responsive or like roddy mentioned, fluid design. The only real part that I pay much attention to is layout. What I mean is this: Being able to create one website, using elements (sections) correctly, that can rearrange the elements as I have said to rearrange them, and determine the font sizes, etc, depending on the screen size. So if I make a page, that is laid out correctly for a desktop site; when someone accesses the website on a mobile device, the elements will be shown in the order from top to bottom that I designate. I may choose to put an Aside as either the second, third, fifth, or whatever position I want it to be. I made a quick mockup of a desktop and two mobile layouts here www.mvgoogle.com The only other thing I can think of is that a system somewhere determines the connection and that could determine what pages get fed to the device; if on cell you would get bare-bones, if on strong wifi you would get closer to the full sites pages. I hope this helps, it is what I was reading this thread to say. I will add that fixed width vs non fix width I prefer fixed, it is much easier to control the variables. Last edit 11 years ago |
|
|
User: Paul-RAGESW 11 years ago
|
|
|
Hi Jim, Thanks for your feedback. What it sounds like to me is that you are concerned not with the fluid responsive design that rearranges itself on a desktop browser as you resize the window and works well on a mobile device, but you really are just concerned with a proper mobile site. I want to emphasize something before I discuss this further. We are working on responsive features. What I gather from what you are saying is that, you would be willing to create the look of the mobile site and the desktop site, but you want EverWeb to make a site that transitions from desktop to mobile for you. In that case, this is obviously already possible with the mobile site option. When you create a responsive page you have code in there for desktop, tablet, phones etc.. Making your page needlessly large for smaller mobile devices. Additionally images may be resized in the browser, but downloaded at a higher width and height again causing needless downloading and bandwidth for mobile users. A separate mobile page serves ONLY the correct content for mobile devices making your website loads faster and more efficiently on a mobile device. When someone says something like "not having a responsive site is costing me customers" I would argue that using a responsive site over a dedicated mobile site would cost you customers because your site will load slower for your customers and as we all know, a slow loading site will cause people to leave your website and in turn make you lose customers. My concern is that some users want a responsive site not for practical reasons, but because that's the current trend people are seeing so they believe is the right way to go. It isn't always the correct way. My second concern, and what Roddy has already mentioned, is that users are confusing Fluid sites with Responsive sites. They can be similar but are not the same thing. And guess what, we're close to releasing full width shapes and more fluid options. In fact version 1.8 will have some features that bring us in this direction. Cory Harrison wants a fluid design as request in his post from 9 months ago here, not necessarily responsive, or perhaps he wants both. I'm not 100% sure. We have to make sure we are talking about the same thing. I hope no one else has taken offence to this discussion. I am still confused on how he can say we are "insulting our customers" when I can tell you that is not my intent. To sum up, we are listening, we are implementing these features but they are difficult. I don't want people thinking that because everyone else is doing something one way that it is the right way to do it. You are building websites for YOUR customers so make sure you are delivering the right stuff to them and not just what you think is "cool" right now. So please when responding if you believe that you are losing customers, or you believe that dedicated mobile pages need to disappear, give me your reasons why, you might just change our own opinions as well. I am always opened to hearing good arguments either way. Lastly, just to emphasis once more so that we don't get a whole bunch of people saying we don't listen or are living on a different planet, we are working on fluid and responsive features. But don't negate my feedback either, I do know a thing or two and I am here to help you make great websites :) Oh and one more thing, the View Desktop Site feature in iOS that many users requested and Apple implemented, that does not work with responsive sites. ------------------------------- Paul EverWeb Developer |
|
|
User: Christopher 11 years ago
|
|
|
Quote: Paul-RAGESW - 04/01/2015 22:46:31 We are working on fluid and responsive features. AWESOME. ------------------------------- rMBP 15", 2.6 Ghz, 16 GB RAM, OS X 10.11.6, with 27" Thunderbolt Cinema Display www.cleetche.com |
|
|
User: Raf P. 11 years ago
|
|
|
For me, a responsive site shouln't have more then 10 pages and the content must meet the technical standards. Images must have the right px, saved for web, right quality, right webfonts, not more then 2 fonts, etc. I mean, no overloaded content, no sliders with 50 images, no 300dpi images, etc. Instead to build 2 sites (desktop and mobile: I'm following Roddy's advice to build the mobile version in a subdomain), I think this can be done with 1 responsive lay-out so it looks good on a desktop and a mobile device as well. So, I have to build 1 site. I think that's clear. The main reason why this issue suddenly is hot for the moment is: "not having a responsive site is costing me customers" ! I'm sorry, but I NEVER said that. Read: I'm losing customers because I CAN'T build a responsive site. That's a big difference. I just want to answer on the customers demand. My proposal to the customer is to build two sites (desktop+ mobile) because it's better, faster, etc. Second reason is that a customer with 1 site came back after a while and asked me why he has to enlarge his site on a mobile by swiping. Answer is: I can fix this by building a second mobile site. It's better, faster, etc. Of course, the man is disappointed. Finally, that's why EW must build-in the possibility to build small responsive sites. Just like EW did when mobile devices came up! I'm sure that was an issue too, but now it's a normal thing. It's just a matter of supply and demand. Last edit 11 years ago ------------------------------- Kind regards, Raphael Pairoux |
|
|
User: Bess S. 11 years ago
|
|
|
I wish I have known Everweb doesn't support responsive website design before I placed the order. Too Bad! app developers, please make it happen soon. it's out-dated if the webpages can't make auto adjustment to fit different displays. Just my personal opinion, but I believe it's most people's opinion too. Disappointed just for this reason for the money I spent! |
|
|
User: George P. 11 years ago
|
|
|
I have to say that the way that Sparkle has the right idea and handles responsive design is quite nicely. It certainly serves as a good model to follow. You may wish to follow along in their video to see it in action: http://youtu.be/UUYHxeOVDXw?t=4m11s
------------------------------- Custom application and web developer. Specializing in Ruby on Rails, WordPress, and any other framework ranging from Ruby and PHP to JavaScript (NodeJS; Meteor, Opal, etc.). |
|
|
User: Gemma B. 11 years ago
|
|
|
Hi All, it certainly seems to be a heated discussion this one! One thing I will say is that I had a notification through Google Webmaster Tools the other day, saying that my site wasn't mobile friendly and therefore would be 'ranked accordingly' for smartphone devices. I used a link in the email to get onto Google's best practice notes to see what they recommend, it certainly seems they want to push people down the 'responsive' design path. Here's a link to it: https://developers.google.com/web/fundamentals/getting-started/your-first-multi-screen-site/ They are already putting a 'mobile friendly' tag in their search engine results page next to websites that are responsive. I assume it will only be a matter of time before they start applying a ranking penalty for those sites which aren't... Thanks, James. |
|
|
User: Roddy 11 years ago
|
|
|
Quote: my site wasn't mobile friendly and therefore would be 'ranked accordingly' for smartphone devices Are you referring to a dedicated smart phone version of your website? Responsive design and "mobile friendly" are not the same thing. A lot of the mobile websites I have looked at are using inappropriate navigation, hovers, text hyperlinks and other stuff that is definitely not mobile friendly. If you have read through all the info on the site you mentioned you will get an idea of how it is unrealistic for someone with no knowledge of responsive web design techniques to create one. A "mobile first" design is a far better option and is all that is required in most cases now that the mobile browsing population has surpassed the static one. The business websites that I design and maintain are all mobile only and have been for the past four years. These are all started up businesses which became profitable in the first three months and 90% of the advertising was screen as opposed to print. Here's an example of a simple mobile first page which is also functional on computers. ------------------------------- Roddy Website: http://everwebwidgets.com Contact: http://everwebwidgets.com/ewWidgets-home/contact.html NOTE: I am an EverWeb user and NOT affiliated with EverWeb! Any opinions expressed in this forum are my own. |
|
|
User: James G. 11 years ago
|
|
| Googles test thing is not quite right, but my pages got passed easily when I ran them through it awhile back. What I read when going through that stuff is that Google wants all desktop websites to have a functional mobile site....if you cater to mobile. On top of that I am sure if there is a pay scale to avoid it if anyone wanted to pay to avoid. | |
|
User: Roddy 11 years ago
|
|
|
This is what Google is looking for... A page is eligible for the “mobile-friendly” label if it meets the following criteria as detected by Googlebot: Avoids software that is not common on mobile devices, like Flash Uses text that is readable without zooming Sizes content to the screen so users don't have to scroll horizontally or zoom Places links far enough apart so that the correct one can be easily tapped The main mistake I see EverWeb users make is related to navigation and other links. Text hyperlinks have no place on a mobile website - use CTA buttons - and make sure every button has a minimum dimension of 30px x 30px. ------------------------------- Roddy Website: http://everwebwidgets.com Contact: http://everwebwidgets.com/ewWidgets-home/contact.html NOTE: I am an EverWeb user and NOT affiliated with EverWeb! Any opinions expressed in this forum are my own. |
|
| Post Reply |
| You must login or signup to post. |