A Must-Read Article If You Use 3G Data On A Smartphone or Tablet

Every web site should have a mobile version; which mobile version should be simplified and optimzed for mobile phones. By "simplified and optimized," I mean that, if nothing else...

a) everything should be in a single column which will resize down to at least 240 pixels (for older smartphones which have 320x240-pixel resolution screens, and they're viewing the page in portrait mode), and will resize up more or less infinitely-wide; and,

b) all graphics should be no wider than 240 pixels (preferably a little more narrow than that so there's a little whitespace on either side if it's centered on a 320x240-pixel screen in portrait mode); and,

c) all graphics should be optimized so that they're as compressed as possible (down to around 70% with .JPG files, for example; your mileage may vary on other compressable file formats) so that they're not only small in terms of pixels, but also small in terms of weight in bytes; and,

d) there should be a minimum of graphics in the first place; and, instead, things like simply specifying bars and other elements in HTML which can simply be assigned a color so they still look nice, but use-up nearly no bandwidth.

And then, each page of the web site should have some javascript in it which senses the browser, and if it's a mobile browser, it automatically sends the site visitor to the mobile version of the page.

That's, at least, how things were done in the early days of mobile phones, when they accessed what was called "the mobile web." Today's smartphonees, however, have browsers in them which are capable of so much more; and on phones like that, what I've just described, above, can look pretty primitive.

So, then, more intelligent javascript which can detect if the phone is or isn't a true "smartphone" or if it's just a "mobile web" type phone, and then it sends the site visitor to the appropriate type of mobile page; and then there'd be two types: One that's like I described above, and another that's remarkably similar to the actual web site which regular computers visit, but which has been made as light as possible, in as many ways and places as possible, so that as little mobile bandwidth as possible is used.

Javascript could also be developed which senses whether the phone is accessing the web site via 3G/4G bandwidth, or a WIFI connection; and when it's a WIFI connection, and the phone's a smartphone with a sufficiently large screen, the regular web site which normal computers access could be served since bandwidth, on WIFI, wouldn't be an issue.

There are all kinds of ways that it can (and should) be done. Many site developers either don't know how, or don't care, or don't know that they're supposed to know.

This genre of problem is nothing new. Web site developers who aren't really professional and don't bother to read usability studies and keep-up with their craft are constantly doing arrogant things which manifestly harm (or at least inconvenience) site visitors. For example, as notebooks (and even desktop) computers are shipping with larger/wider screens, said screen are configured to higher and higher horizontal numbers of pixels. Just a couple years ago, a typical 15.4-inch screened notebook computer shipped with a 1280x800 pixel resolution; now, it's 1377 to even up to 1600-something pixels wide.

The problem with that is that an ignorant and inexperienced web developer will buy one of those machines, and then arrogantly assume that everyone's screen is like his/hers; and so s/he will design the width of the web site to nearly fill it...

...which cause those with not-quite-so-wide screens to have to do horizontal scrolling. Everyone on the Internet is okay with vertical scrolling... it's the way it's always been, and it logical and necessary. But usabiltiy studies show that horizontal scrolling will chase site visitors away in droves.

That's why the big web sites -- CNN and the like -- all keep the width of their pages to no more than around 900-something pixels... 920 to maybe 960. Of course, as trends studies show that most end-users have wider screens, that number may go up; but, for now, a web page's content area being no wider than 900-something pixels is pretty much the norm at the moment.

Similar things were seen in the old days, when most people were still using dial-up, yet no small number of others had DSL and cable modems (broadband). Some web designers who had broadband arrogantly assumed that EVERYONE had broadband...

...and so that's when we began to see FLASH-heavy web sites which were entertainingly animated on a broadband-connected computer...

...but which were so slow on dial-up-connected machines that the user could stand-up from his/her machine, and run out for coffee before the page finished downloading.

Web designer ignorance and arrogance has been around almost from the beginning, and will continuee to be around for as long as amateurs try to build web sites.