Quote Originally Posted by lutrov View Post
James Pearce said a few sensible things about this around 18 months ago, when the whole "responsive" thing was starting to make a lot of web designers salivate
Speaking of which. I guess if one aims at scamming its clients into always building two sets (or even three, as we've seen) of websites instead of one, even if the content is fairly light it doesn't warrant a stripped down version, the whole responsive web design thing may seem like a "business" stealer. Under these circumstances, so called "web designers" carrying a viral load against responsive web design is to be completely understood.


As an aside.

I don't know, some of you may have noticed, but I have a thing for web developers with strong opinion but weak representative work. Why? Because all of us enjoy talking more than working.

James Pearce is the perfect illustration as to why I'm so bugged by these people.

He would be so much better off using responsive web design, for the following reasons:

- the content on his site is fairly light, which is a good thing altogether. What's there to cut, beats me. Only the user expectations of finding a normal web site, maybe.

- going on his site from mobile (smartphone or tablet), a broken "feature" it requires you to know which version to type in in the address bar, which is the worst thing ever: who want's to always type m.www? Not me.

- if you don't do the above m.www thing, and simply type www. another ugly issue on mobile, thanks to the same "feature": it shows you a page, where it starts asking you: "It seems that you required the desktop version but you are on mobile".

What the user is thinking:

What? Are you training pigs to fly? I never asked for a desktop or a mobile version of you site. I merely asked you to show me your page, that's it, so quit bugging me with your unfinished and unpolished solutions! Arghhh, never mind!!!