Mobile First Device Detection

Posted on by
Reply

I think Luke Wroblewski’s approach to responsive web design, which he calls RESS (Responsive Web Design + Server Side Components) is a pretty solid concept. I”ll let him explain:

In a nutshell, RESS combines adaptive layouts with server side component (not full page) optimization. So a single set of page templates define an entire Web site for all devices but key components within that site have device-class specific implementations that are rendered server side.

The idea is that instead of serving every device the exact same content the exact same way, some things are served differently depending on the device class (not specific device!).

Luke ends his post with a note that relying on user agent detection can be unreliable at times, and might be an issue in some situations:

That said, there may be a few unsolved challenges.

Relying on user agent detection on the server to decide which device class specific components to include could be an issue for some. There’s a lot of debate about how accurate user agent detection is.

This is a growing rather than shrinking issue; seemingly every day a new mobile device is launched, and keeping up with all the various user agent strings is difficult bordering on impossible.

However, what if, instead of trying to ferret out whether the connecting device is one of hundreds of possible mobile device/browser combinations, we instead attempt to discover if it’s one of a few known desktop browsers, and then beyond that try to separate out large (iPad & other tablets) and small (phone-size) “mobile” devices? This is the approach that Categorizr takes, and I think it has a lot of potential.

What makes Categorizr different?

Instead of assuming the device is a desktop, and detecting mobile and tablet device user agents, Categorizr is a mobile first based device detection. It assumes the device is mobile and sets up checks to see if it’s a desktop or tablet. Desktops are fairly easy to detect, the user agents are known, and are not changing anytime soon. Tablets are also pretty easy to detect.

By assuming devices are mobile from the beginning, Categorizr aims to be more future friendly. When new phones come out, you don’t need to worry if their new user agent is in your device detection script since devices are assumed mobile from the start.

I think this approach allows you to avoid the common pitfalls of responsive web design. Obviously it’s not a panacea (nothing is), but it has potential to be a solid technique.

What do you think is missing with this method? Are there situations or contexts that it overlooks or glosses over?

The Importance of Flexible Content

Posted on by
Reply

Jeremy Keith writes about why we shouldn’t be designing around “common” breakpoints. He advocates instead crafting the design and its behavior at various sizes around the needs of the content, rather than picking breakpoints that, while seemingly logical today, are in fact arbitrary and will in all likelihood be much less relevant a short time from now.

I agree wholeheartedly.

Taking this approach a step further, we should be insisting on flexible content. If the content is inflexible, then it won’t be able to adapt and flow into the numerous layouts necessary for today’s devices, much less the multitude necessary for the devices of tomorrow, next week, next month, and next year.

In conclusion, don’t just design with content in mind; create content (or collaborate with those responsible for creating content) with flexibility in mind.

The Little Things

Posted on by
Reply

Tonight I was putting my (8 month old) son to bed. We were sitting in the chair in his room while he drank a bottle. He finished drinking, and turned around, put his head on my chest, and started to go to sleep. He then proceeded to alternate between pushing his head into my chest going to sleep, and waking up enough to raise up, smile at me, and try to play (grabbing for my face, etc.).

It’s the little things.

Online banking sucks, but it doesn’t have to

Posted on by
Reply

http://micho.biz/online-banking-sucks/

Great post. One thing I disagree with, though:

This might sound like a great idea on paper, but if you watch real users what happens is that they are completely unable to remember their passwords… and they end up resetting them every time they log in, or writing them in a piece of paper or a TXT file on their desktop. What’s worse, a weak password, or a password that sits on your desk?

In that sense, PIN codes are much safer: a 4 digit code you can actually remember and won’t ever write on paper. If somebody types in the wrong code thrice, they’ll lose their card.

I’d argue that account break-ins are much more likely to happen because of remote issues (e.g. compromised server and poor credential storage policies, brute-force attacks, etc.) than local issues (someone stealing the password written down on your desk). As a result, I think a strong password you can’t remember is much better than a weak one you can. Besides, you shouldn’t be trying to remember passwords (or writing them down on paper) – that’s what LastPass, 1Password, et al are for. I do agree that “brainless password policies” are ridiculous. I’ve seen some that allow only alphanumeric characters and no special ones. I mean, really? Fire your lazy developers and get serious about your user experience.