<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Mobile friendly sites look good, should they be device specific?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://jkontherun.com/2008/07/31/mobile-friendly/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://jkontherun.com/2008/07/31/mobile-friendly/</link>
	<description>Using mobile devices since they weighed 30 lbs.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 17 Nov 2009 01:25:52 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: JonV</title>
		<link>http://jkontherun.com/2008/07/31/mobile-friendly/#comment-5373</link>
		<dc:creator>JonV</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Aug 2008 10:39:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jkontherun.wordpress.com/2008/07/31/mobile-friendly#comment-5373</guid>
		<description>&lt;div xmlns=&quot;http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml&quot;&gt;
        &lt;p&gt;@Toby I agree. Make the mobile site standard for all mobile users, then make a specific iphone standard if you want to. Not the other way around. This is turning into a IE bs situation all over again.&lt;/p&gt;
      &lt;/div&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<p>@Toby I agree. Make the mobile site standard for all mobile users, then make a specific iphone standard if you want to. Not the other way around. This is turning into a IE bs situation all over again.</p>
</p></div>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Cody B</title>
		<link>http://jkontherun.com/2008/07/31/mobile-friendly/#comment-5375</link>
		<dc:creator>Cody B</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Aug 2008 10:37:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jkontherun.wordpress.com/2008/07/31/mobile-friendly#comment-5375</guid>
		<description>&lt;div xmlns=&quot;http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml&quot;&gt;
        &lt;p&gt;It would be nice if there was a mobile display markup language.  It would be possible to build something that each browser could interpret differently but display the same content.  Something that would share a lot of principles of XML.  Have the content stored as objects, and then have each device display it in its native browser. &lt;/p&gt;
      &lt;/div&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<p>It would be nice if there was a mobile display markup language.  It would be possible to build something that each browser could interpret differently but display the same content.  Something that would share a lot of principles of XML.  Have the content stored as objects, and then have each device display it in its native browser. </p>
</p></div>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Toby</title>
		<link>http://jkontherun.com/2008/07/31/mobile-friendly/#comment-5380</link>
		<dc:creator>Toby</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Aug 2008 10:21:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jkontherun.wordpress.com/2008/07/31/mobile-friendly#comment-5380</guid>
		<description>&lt;div xmlns=&quot;http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml&quot;&gt;&lt;p&gt;If the alternate formatting is only displayed for users of that specific device, does it really matter to those of us who don&#039;t have that device?&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;I would say no - if someone wants to create a version of their mobile site with an iPhone look and feel, go nuts.  Just show me the un-iPhoned version when I visit on my BlackBerry.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;iPhone users - how much do you appreciate iPhone-specific mobile sites?  Is it really important that a mobile site looks iPhoney, like the UMPC site in the article?  Or is it enough that a site is formatted for a small screen?&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;That&#039;s a question I&#039;ve struggled with lately when building mobile websites - is it worth taking the time to create an iPhone &quot;skin&quot; in addition to a plain mobile view?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<p>If the alternate formatting is only displayed for users of that specific device, does it really matter to those of us who don&#8217;t have that device?</p>
<p>I would say no &#8211; if someone wants to create a version of their mobile site with an iPhone look and feel, go nuts.  Just show me the un-iPhoned version when I visit on my BlackBerry.</p>
<p>iPhone users &#8211; how much do you appreciate iPhone-specific mobile sites?  Is it really important that a mobile site looks iPhoney, like the UMPC site in the article?  Or is it enough that a site is formatted for a small screen?</p>
<p>That&#8217;s a question I&#8217;ve struggled with lately when building mobile websites &#8211; is it worth taking the time to create an iPhone &#8220;skin&#8221; in addition to a plain mobile view?</p>
</div>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JonV</title>
		<link>http://jkontherun.com/2008/07/31/mobile-friendly/#comment-5382</link>
		<dc:creator>JonV</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Aug 2008 09:12:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jkontherun.wordpress.com/2008/07/31/mobile-friendly#comment-5382</guid>
		<description>&lt;div xmlns=&quot;http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml&quot;&gt;
        &lt;p&gt;I think it&#039;s a horrible idea. We should have standards. We don&#039;t want the whole IE experience again that we went through on desktops. Digg.com just introduced their mobile site m.digg.com and when I visit from my new Curve, it looks horrible. It forces me now to install Opera Mini because I have no other option if more sites follow this.  The unfortunate thing is many sites are all iphone/safari specific now. Many people are not going to buy an iphone, we still use other brands. If it wasn&#039;t acceptable in the IE days, it should not be acceptable now. Browsers will get better, but we are still waiting for that day.&lt;/p&gt;
      &lt;/div&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<p>I think it&#8217;s a horrible idea. We should have standards. We don&#8217;t want the whole IE experience again that we went through on desktops. Digg.com just introduced their mobile site m.digg.com and when I visit from my new Curve, it looks horrible. It forces me now to install Opera Mini because I have no other option if more sites follow this.  The unfortunate thing is many sites are all iphone/safari specific now. Many people are not going to buy an iphone, we still use other brands. If it wasn&#8217;t acceptable in the IE days, it should not be acceptable now. Browsers will get better, but we are still waiting for that day.</p>
</p></div>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark</title>
		<link>http://jkontherun.com/2008/07/31/mobile-friendly/#comment-5383</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 Jul 2008 22:46:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jkontherun.wordpress.com/2008/07/31/mobile-friendly#comment-5383</guid>
		<description>&lt;div xmlns=&quot;http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml&quot;&gt;
        &lt;p&gt;Many of the mobile sites I frequent offer, more or less, the same content as their desktop browser brethern but without all the images and advertising. And that works for me. In fact, there are a few mobile sites I use from the desktop because of that difference.&lt;/p&gt;
      &lt;/div&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<p>Many of the mobile sites I frequent offer, more or less, the same content as their desktop browser brethern but without all the images and advertising. And that works for me. In fact, there are a few mobile sites I use from the desktop because of that difference.</p>
</p></div>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris K</title>
		<link>http://jkontherun.com/2008/07/31/mobile-friendly/#comment-5384</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris K</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 Jul 2008 15:02:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jkontherun.wordpress.com/2008/07/31/mobile-friendly#comment-5384</guid>
		<description>&lt;div xmlns=&quot;http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml&quot;&gt;
        &lt;p&gt;I&#039;m all for it, when it&#039;s a layout fix without the usual crap that you lose from mobile-optimized sites.  Something simple like assuming no better than a 320px-wide display isn&#039;t bad, but when you trim back on features and information, that&#039;s when I lose interest, since I&#039;m just going to move to a full desktop/laptop OS to finish up my reading.&lt;/p&gt;
      &lt;/div&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<p>I&#8217;m all for it, when it&#8217;s a layout fix without the usual crap that you lose from mobile-optimized sites.  Something simple like assuming no better than a 320px-wide display isn&#8217;t bad, but when you trim back on features and information, that&#8217;s when I lose interest, since I&#8217;m just going to move to a full desktop/laptop OS to finish up my reading.</p>
</p></div>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: turn.self.off</title>
		<link>http://jkontherun.com/2008/07/31/mobile-friendly/#comment-5386</link>
		<dc:creator>turn.self.off</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 Jul 2008 13:21:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jkontherun.wordpress.com/2008/07/31/mobile-friendly#comment-5386</guid>
		<description>&lt;div xmlns=&quot;http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml&quot;&gt;&lt;p&gt;the problem is basically this: bitmap images and fixed sized tables.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;if one have any of these, the page cant reflow without a lot of cpu power under the hood.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;and mobile devices generally dont have that, as they have to give priority to battery life.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;and thats when you get proxy browsers like opera mini.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;iphone specific pages are an abomination as they are designed to look good only on a set display size.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;sadly they are easy to make as apple made available templates for just such a reason.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;there was a reason why java only supported one mouse button and a limited set of other inputs. sun basically boiled it down to the lowest common denominator.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;funny thing is that stuff like mouseover and other ticks that make ajaxy pages so fun to use on a laptop or desktop falls flat ones one use a touchscreen that cant tell the diff between moving and clicking.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;one should really grasp the old design proverb, its not what you can add, but what you can take away...&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<p>the problem is basically this: bitmap images and fixed sized tables.</p>
<p>if one have any of these, the page cant reflow without a lot of cpu power under the hood.</p>
<p>and mobile devices generally dont have that, as they have to give priority to battery life.</p>
<p>and thats when you get proxy browsers like opera mini.</p>
<p>iphone specific pages are an abomination as they are designed to look good only on a set display size.</p>
<p>sadly they are easy to make as apple made available templates for just such a reason.</p>
<p>there was a reason why java only supported one mouse button and a limited set of other inputs. sun basically boiled it down to the lowest common denominator.</p>
<p>funny thing is that stuff like mouseover and other ticks that make ajaxy pages so fun to use on a laptop or desktop falls flat ones one use a touchscreen that cant tell the diff between moving and clicking.</p>
<p>one should really grasp the old design proverb, its not what you can add, but what you can take away&#8230;</p>
</div>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brian Kirk</title>
		<link>http://jkontherun.com/2008/07/31/mobile-friendly/#comment-5387</link>
		<dc:creator>Brian Kirk</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 Jul 2008 11:59:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jkontherun.wordpress.com/2008/07/31/mobile-friendly#comment-5387</guid>
		<description>&lt;div xmlns=&quot;http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml&quot;&gt;
        &lt;p&gt;with any standard, you’ll find variants. in my opinion standards should simply define a set of minimum requirements that must be met so that everyone regardless of device type can make use of the application. if you have a device such as the iPhone which can offer a cleaner user experience because of screen size, touch pad, etc. then why limit the application design because someone may not have an iPhone?&lt;/p&gt;
      &lt;/div&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<p>with any standard, you’ll find variants. in my opinion standards should simply define a set of minimum requirements that must be met so that everyone regardless of device type can make use of the application. if you have a device such as the iPhone which can offer a cleaner user experience because of screen size, touch pad, etc. then why limit the application design because someone may not have an iPhone?</p>
</p></div>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kevin Lim</title>
		<link>http://jkontherun.com/2008/07/31/mobile-friendly/#comment-5388</link>
		<dc:creator>Kevin Lim</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 Jul 2008 11:31:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jkontherun.wordpress.com/2008/07/31/mobile-friendly#comment-5388</guid>
		<description>&lt;div xmlns=&quot;http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml&quot;&gt;&lt;p&gt;The last mobile web standard I recall was WAP, and we knew how dismal that was. Perhaps popular blog platforms should release mobile theme plugins to cater for various MIDs. &lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;On a related note, I recently did a videocast demonstrating the three WordPress plug-ins that take advantage of the iPhone interface, viewable here: &lt;a href=&quot;http://theory.isthereason.com/?p=2274&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://theory.isthereason.com/?p=2274&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<p>The last mobile web standard I recall was WAP, and we knew how dismal that was. Perhaps popular blog platforms should release mobile theme plugins to cater for various MIDs. </p>
<p>On a related note, I recently did a videocast demonstrating the three WordPress plug-ins that take advantage of the iPhone interface, viewable here: <a href="http://theory.isthereason.com/?p=2274" rel="nofollow">http://theory.isthereason.com/?p=2274</a></p>
</div>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steve Paine</title>
		<link>http://jkontherun.com/2008/07/31/mobile-friendly/#comment-5390</link>
		<dc:creator>Steve Paine</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 Jul 2008 10:50:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jkontherun.wordpress.com/2008/07/31/mobile-friendly#comment-5390</guid>
		<description>&lt;div xmlns=&quot;http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml&quot;&gt;&lt;p&gt;Good to know its working OK. One of the readers suggested the plugin and as it was a 2 minute job it seemed silly not to do it.&lt;br /&gt;
Interesting thing is the stats...&lt;br /&gt;
Twice as many page views, an increase in customer loyalty and an increase in visitors for the iphone screen size.&lt;br /&gt;
Leads me to believe that people still prefer mobile sites even with the best MID browser in the world.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Steve. From a campsite in Freudenburg. Living on the EDGE!&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<p>Good to know its working OK. One of the readers suggested the plugin and as it was a 2 minute job it seemed silly not to do it.<br />
Interesting thing is the stats&#8230;<br />
Twice as many page views, an increase in customer loyalty and an increase in visitors for the iphone screen size.<br />
Leads me to believe that people still prefer mobile sites even with the best MID browser in the world.</p>
<p>Steve. From a campsite in Freudenburg. Living on the EDGE!</p>
</div>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MiKeN</title>
		<link>http://jkontherun.com/2008/07/31/mobile-friendly/#comment-5392</link>
		<dc:creator>MiKeN</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 Jul 2008 10:21:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jkontherun.wordpress.com/2008/07/31/mobile-friendly#comment-5392</guid>
		<description>&lt;div xmlns=&quot;http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml&quot;&gt;
        &lt;p&gt;I believe they should just have a standard already formatted for all mobile phones. I will try Chippys site on Opera 9.5 when I get home to see how that renders and hopefully it will be the same (or remotely).&lt;/p&gt;
      &lt;/div&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<p>I believe they should just have a standard already formatted for all mobile phones. I will try Chippys site on Opera 9.5 when I get home to see how that renders and hopefully it will be the same (or remotely).</p>
</p></div>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
