Comments on: Mobile web monopoly http://akrabat.com/opinion/mobile-web-monopoly/ Developing PHP software in the Real World, by Rob Allen Thu, 29 Jul 2010 17:50:10 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 By: Tim http://akrabat.com/opinion/mobile-web-monopoly/#comment-31128 Tim Tue, 23 Feb 2010 18:51:58 +0000 http://akrabat.com/?p=932#comment-31128 Yeah, I find the best part of developing for Safari is that you can develop for Android on a linux box and it will more than likely work on Safari. I develop for webkit. Yeah, I find the best part of developing for Safari is that you can develop for Android on a linux box and it will more than likely work on Safari. I develop for webkit.

]]> By: Anze http://akrabat.com/opinion/mobile-web-monopoly/#comment-31077 Anze Mon, 22 Feb 2010 00:13:43 +0000 http://akrabat.com/?p=932#comment-31077 At work we used Adobe Device Central (http://www.adobe.com/products/creativesuite/devicecentral/) and it worked great. Of course we tested on some real popular phones too, but in a stage of development device central was a big time saver. It's not perfect, but you can easily test different screen resolutions, etc. At work we used Adobe Device Central (http://www.adobe.com/products/creativesuite/devicecentral/) and it worked great. Of course we tested on some real popular phones too, but in a stage of development device central was a big time saver.

It's not perfect, but you can easily test different screen resolutions, etc.

]]> By: Nikola http://akrabat.com/opinion/mobile-web-monopoly/#comment-30792 Nikola Wed, 10 Feb 2010 12:21:41 +0000 http://akrabat.com/?p=932#comment-30792 mobile webOS safari ... I mean mobile webOS webkit :) mobile webOS safari ... I mean mobile webOS webkit :)

]]> By: Nikola http://akrabat.com/opinion/mobile-web-monopoly/#comment-30791 Nikola Wed, 10 Feb 2010 12:20:29 +0000 http://akrabat.com/?p=932#comment-30791 I fully agree with ppk and you on this point - mobiile web development != mobile safari development. And that's what I'm preaching to the marketing folks at my company. However a small remark. You claim, that mobile safari is the easiest to test against, because of the existence of the iPod touch. While half true, it ain't accurate. Mobile webOS safari is the easiest to test against, since you can download the VM for _free_ and have a fully blown QUERTY to type in any kind of weird URLs. Same goes for mobile Android, I'm not sure if there is an emulator for it. I fully agree with ppk and you on this point - mobiile web development != mobile safari development. And that's what I'm preaching to the marketing folks at my company.

However a small remark. You claim, that mobile safari is the easiest to test against, because of the existence of the iPod touch. While half true, it ain't accurate. Mobile webOS safari is the easiest to test against, since you can download the VM for _free_ and have a fully blown QUERTY to type in any kind of weird URLs. Same goes for mobile Android, I'm not sure if there is an emulator for it.

]]> By: Jason Austin http://akrabat.com/opinion/mobile-web-monopoly/#comment-30767 Jason Austin Tue, 09 Feb 2010 13:21:40 +0000 http://akrabat.com/?p=932#comment-30767 If you are doing hardcore mobile development and really need to test in multiple devices, we found a service called DeviceAnywhere (http://www.deviceanywhere.com/) that looks to provide just that. Be warned, it's not cheap at all, but it does afford you access to multiple devices on multiple networks to test against. And in the long run, it is cheaper to do that than purchase a bunch of phones and plans for testing. We've been going down the mobile web route for the past year, and do try to develop a user-friendly interface for 3 main device types: Web-kit phones, Smartphones, and then the old-school text-browser-only phones. We do device detection then swap layouts based on the type of device viewing the site. It has served us well so far. If you are doing hardcore mobile development and really need to test in multiple devices, we found a service called DeviceAnywhere (http://www.deviceanywhere.com/) that looks to provide just that. Be warned, it's not cheap at all, but it does afford you access to multiple devices on multiple networks to test against. And in the long run, it is cheaper to do that than purchase a bunch of phones and plans for testing.

We've been going down the mobile web route for the past year, and do try to develop a user-friendly interface for 3 main device types: Web-kit phones, Smartphones, and then the old-school text-browser-only phones. We do device detection then swap layouts based on the type of device viewing the site. It has served us well so far.

]]> By: Rob... http://akrabat.com/opinion/mobile-web-monopoly/#comment-30763 Rob... Tue, 09 Feb 2010 10:24:15 +0000 http://akrabat.com/?p=932#comment-30763 There's a world of difference between a design that works well on a greater than 800px wide screen and one that works well on a 320px wide one. The whole zooming in thing is "okay", but not as great as a site that's intended to work well on a small screen. You'd certainly hope that standards code would enable you to build one site for "small" screens that worked across all devices though! Letting the device manufacturer sort out the rendering is fine as long as you don't mind a sub-standard result - c.f. IE6 :) Regards, Rob... There's a world of difference between a design that works well on a greater than 800px wide screen and one that works well on a 320px wide one.

The whole zooming in thing is "okay", but not as great as a site that's intended to work well on a small screen.

You'd certainly hope that standards code would enable you to build one site for "small" screens that worked across all devices though!

Letting the device manufacturer sort out the rendering is fine as long as you don't mind a sub-standard result - c.f. IE6 :)

Regards,

Rob...

]]> By: Gargoyle http://akrabat.com/opinion/mobile-web-monopoly/#comment-30762 Gargoyle Tue, 09 Feb 2010 10:08:34 +0000 http://akrabat.com/?p=932#comment-30762 I thought one of the main points for Safari on the iPhone is that it's a full version of Safari 4 (Without flash, etc). Surly the best approach for web developers is to develop standards compliant code, and let the device manufacturers sort out the rendering!? Are we actually going to learn from our mistakes, or are we just going to keep targeting todays "fun" platform, only to be stuck with repeating campaigns to "ditch" netscape, IE6 (7,8 & 9 ;-) ), etc? I thought one of the main points for Safari on the iPhone is that it's a full version of Safari 4 (Without flash, etc).

Surly the best approach for web developers is to develop standards compliant code, and let the device manufacturers sort out the rendering!?

Are we actually going to learn from our mistakes, or are we just going to keep targeting todays "fun" platform, only to be stuck with repeating campaigns to "ditch" netscape, IE6 (7,8 & 9 ;-) ), etc?

]]>