If you want to convert their current website to a mobile site with minimal effort, there is a project called phpMobilizer that might help try it at code.google.com/p/phpmobilizer
I have a hosting account with fastnext. they told that I can run sites for mobile with my account (by doing php configuration).
Can I do with them? or I need to have a special mobile site hosting account with another company? If so, I would be thankful if you could advice me which is/are better?
Unless you’re specifically targeting old handsets, forget about WML.
Focus your energy on an HTML or XHTML site that provides a good experience on a small screen, with low bandwidth, and with limited input options (i.e. no pointer or QWERTY keyboard).
In particular, make sure you use the site yourself on the most popular handsets in your target market.
I’ve realized that just like I needed a Constant Contact system for my newsletter years ago, it’s a heck of a lot easier to find a similar system for mobile marketing. I came across SmallBusinessMobileAdvertising(dot)com and am in the free trial right now. What got me interested in this as an SMS list builder is that the credits are rolled over into the next month if you don’t use them. And, that seemed to be a hangup with all the other mobile promotion systems I tried. They all have their monthly fees and whether you use the system or not, you’re still charged the next month the same amount.
I would be curious if there are any others that people have tried as I’m still looking for what the best deal might be to put all my eggs into.
HTML web site would be the best option. But I believe that having Wap satelite for your web site would be really great.
I believe any linux web host will be fine.
Well done on the best reply fattyjules, it’s about time we had some extra mobile designers who understand the accepted rules. I would expand upon it with the below:
WML is dead, don’t bother with it unless your going after old handsets (the 0.01% audience).
XHTML-MP has very little general purpose support (may as well just use HTML).
PHP redirects are impractical as the overhead for detection (and error ratio) is too high.
handheld stylesheets and CSS3 aren’t equally supported and therefore are unreliable.
Nothing beats physical testing, some devices have emulators but their not perfect.
I would say to the OP that his best bet is to indeed have a separate design that has reduced content per page (to avoid heavy scrolling), reduced image sizes (small screen is not conductive to large images), reformed navigation that’s finger friendly (as there’s no mouse or keyboard to get pixel perfect selection), having a flexible single column design (as screen sizes are small and need to cram a lot in) and keeping file sizes minimal (mobile broadband can be pretty bad in terms of speed).
I would say to the OP that his best bet is to indeed have a separate design that has reduced content per page (to avoid heavy scrolling), reduced image sizes (small screen is not conductive to large images), reformed navigation that’s finger friendly (as there’s no mouse or keyboard to get pixel perfect selection), having a flexible single column design (as screen sizes are small and need to cram a lot in) and keeping file sizes minimal (mobile broadband can be pretty bad in terms of speed).
When I use my mobile phone for browsing web site I switch all image loading off.
I think a lot of other people do the same.
See the thing is, those PHP scripts that detect the device have a couple of fatal flaws… firstly it’s the issue scale, there’s approximately 10 new cellphones released worldwide with web browsing capability every week, as such for those scripts to accurately redirect and catch all handsets it would require constant upgrades and more than several hundred thousand “detections - as each mobile device uses it’s own unique code”, which none of those scripts can claim - and even if they could the sheer number of variables for the scripts to check against would seriously start clocking some CPU overtime. The second issue is unfortunately many of those phones use the same “calling cards” as desktop browsers or they allow that value to be edited (some networks even edit the value when you use their network - thus allowing custom software like browsers to be added to the device). Essentially using those scripts is like firing a shotgun into a flock of starlings, sure you’ll catch a few of the big birds that everyone sees flapping about but the detection ratio for getting ALL mobile devices (which is what their intended for - for the consistent browsing experience) is probably less than 20% accurate. As such I always recommend just giving the end user the choice and not adding any redirect scripts.
MyDomAinZ, I just examined the source code that service produced and it’s probably among the worst built mobile page I’ve ever seen. Tonnes of commented code (bloat which is literally costing the end user dollars for nothing), XHTML-MP via the WAP forum (who are now a “floater” - as in pretty dead), VERY poor usability, divitis, poor semantics… the list is endless. If it wasn’t for the fact it’s a free service, I would be demanding a refund.
Yes WML is really dead, the people who created the language officially deprecated it.
No XHTML is not useless (if you just use it as recoded HTML) however true XHTML (served correctly as the application+xhtml/xml MIME type) is NOT supported by any mobile device (or for that matter Internet Explorer). While the .mobi “guidelines (not rules)” say you should use XHTML-MP, they are neither a standards body, nor are they in a position to dictate mobile behaviour. Their just a faddish domain registrar providing TLD’s for people who don’t need one (the .mobi extension has little to no public recognition and if you code your site properly, you don’t need an entirely separate domain name for the mobile design). Their guidelines do give a good sense of how to produce a mobile design (I’ve read them cover to cover) however their not rules you should follow entirely, just use good ole reliable HTML.
