wmlprogramming : Messages : 34502-34531 of 34585

http://twitter.com/tkadlec

Interesting post, Luca. Thanks for sharing!

The user-experience delivered by RWD is bound to be inferior to the one delivered by a mobile optimized website.

This depends. :) I don't believe RWD is "bound" to be inferior, though it often can be. Neither RWD or UA detection is inherently "better" than the other. They're both tools. Put them in the right hands, and you can have a masterpiece. Put them in the wrong hands and you get a pile of junk. I've seen RWD sites that are horrible, and RWD sites that are fantastic. Likewise, I've seen separate sites that are horrible, and separate sites that are fantastic. It all depends on how they are built.

...beware of RWD when it is sold for what it is not.

This I agree with, wholeheartedly. There is a lot of dogma on both sides of this debate but the reality is that neither UA detection nor RWD is the solution: they are instead pieces of it. Individually, they both have issues that can be difficult to overcome.

I'm increasingly of the belief that the best approach is most often to combine the two (what Luke Wroblewski calls RESS�http://www.lukew.com/ff/entry.asp?1392).

Take care,

Tim

---------------------------------------------

http://timkadlec.com

http://responsiveenhancement.com

On Sun, Apr 22, 2012 at 8:36 AM, Luca Passani <luca.passani@...> wrote:

�

I was at a conference in DC last�Friday. I blogged about it and this inspired�some considerations on "responsive web design" that are probably relevant reading for the people here:

http://www.scientiamobile.com/blog/post/view/id/17/title/MoDevUX-in-DC

One thing is clear. Responsive Web Design is a shortcut for those who cannot afford to create and maintain a site separate from the main desktop website. The user-experience delivered by RWD is bound to be inferior to the one delivered by a mobile optimized website. This can of course be acceptable to some because of the most classical application of the "value vs cost" equation, but beware of RWD when it is sold for what it is not.

Thank you

Luca

#34503

From: Luca Passani <luca.passani@...>
Date: Sun Apr 22, 2012 7:41 pm
Subject: Re: MoDevUX in DC (opinions on Responsive Web Design in practice)

luca_passani

Glad you liked the blog post Tim, but I have to disagree with you.

SSD (server-Side Detection) can only be superior to RWD and the demonstration of
this is pure logic.

SSD does not exclude RWD. But RWD excludes SSD.

If you have SSD, you can still serve RWD to Desktop and certain categories of
devices, but manage legacy devices that don't go along well with RWD  in special
ways.

If you embrace RWD to avoid the need for SSD, you are stuck with
one-size-fits-all. What do you do when a customer tells you that your carefully
built RWD site does not work with, say, Nokia N8 or some OS5 BlackBerry ? who
will touch anything in a RWD site? who is going to test the whole thing on all
other devices?

This can become a deadly trap, particularly because those who embarked on RWD
will prefer to jump in the fire rather than admit they were wrong and revert to
SSD to fix the problem.

Also, web represents 90%+ of HTTP traffic on regular sites. Techniques to build
regular websites are mastered. RWD is going to add an extra layer of complexity
that may or may not be justified .

Of course RESS is good. But RESS means SSD   way more than it means RWD

Luca

On 4/22/2012 3:16 PM, Tim Kadlec wrote:
> Interesting post, Luca. Thanks for sharing!
>
> The user-experience delivered by RWD is bound to be inferior to the one
>> delivered by a mobile optimized website.
>
> This depends. :) I don't believe RWD is "bound" to be inferior, though it
> often can be. Neither RWD or UA detection is inherently "better" than the
> other. They're both tools. Put them in the right hands, and you can have a
> masterpiece. Put them in the wrong hands and you get a pile of junk. I've
> seen RWD sites that are horrible, and RWD sites that are fantastic.
> Likewise, I've seen separate sites that are horrible, and separate sites
> that are fantastic. It all depends on how they are built.
>
> ...beware of RWD when it is sold for what it is not.
>
>
> This I agree with, wholeheartedly. There is a lot of dogma on both sides of
> this debate but the reality is that neither UA detection nor RWD is the
> solution: they are instead pieces of it. Individually, they both have
> issues that can be difficult to overcome.
>
> I'm increasingly of the belief that the best approach is most often to
> combine the two (what Luke Wroblewski calls RESS
> http://www.lukew.com/ff/entry.asp?1392).
>
> Take care,
> Tim
>
> ---------------------------------------------
> http://twitter.com/tkadlec
> http://timkadlec.com
> http://responsiveenhancement.com
>
>
>
> On Sun, Apr 22, 2012 at 8:36 AM, Luca Passani <
> luca.passani@...> wrote:
>
>> **
>>
>>
>>
>> I was at a conference in DC last Friday. I blogged about it and this
>> inspired some considerations on "responsive web design" that are probably
>> relevant reading for the people here:
>>
>> http://www.scientiamobile.com/blog/post/view/id/17/title/MoDevUX-in-DC
>>
>> One thing is clear. Responsive Web Design is a shortcut for those who
>> cannot afford to create and maintain a site separate from the main desktop
>> website. The user-experience delivered by RWD is bound to be inferior to
>> the one delivered by a mobile optimized website. This can of course be
>> acceptable to some because of the most classical application of the "value
>> vs cost" equation, but beware of RWD when it is sold for what it is not.
>>
>> Thank you
>>
>> Luca
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>

#34504

From: Tim Kadlec <tim@...>
Date: Sun Apr 22, 2012 9:58 pm
Subject: Re: MoDevUX in DC (opinions on Responsive Web Design in practice)

bkball_addict

http://twitter.com/tkadlec

Thanks for the response, Luca.

I think we're actually close to being on the same page, it's just a matter of perspective.

If you embrace RWD to avoid the need for SSD, you are stuck with
one-size-fits-all. What do you do when a customer tells you that your carefully
built RWD site does not work with, say, Nokia N8 or some OS5 BlackBerry ? who
will touch anything in a RWD site? who is going to test the whole thing on all
other devices?

You shouldn't be embracing RWD to avoid SSD (though that's admittedly how it's sometimes presented).

One of my favorite presentations on the topic is Bryan Rieger's "Adaptation" (http://www.slideshare.net/yiibu/adaptation-why-responsive-design-actually-begins-on-the-server). The approach he describes is complex, but also perhaps the most robust I have seen. He's not picking one or the other, he's marrying the two techniques to create something much more powerful.

The key is not expecting to be able to solve all of your problems simply with CSS and JavaScript, but also being careful about how you apply SSD (enhance, don't exclude).

Of course, as you say, this adds complexity. There are always trade-offs that must be considered before choosing any solution and the correct answer can ultimately only be decided on a per project basis.

We've found ourselves in a tricky position as an industry. People have been debating this so long and with such intensity that it's become difficult for people to see the grey. What I really want to see is people, from both sides of the debate, trying to learn from each other and combine the two approaches.

Take care,

Tim

---------------------------------------------

http://timkadlec.com

http://responsiveenhancement.com

On Sun, Apr 22, 2012 at 2:41 PM, Luca Passani <luca.passani@...> wrote:

Glad you liked the blog post Tim, but I have to disagree with you.

SSD (server-Side Detection) can only be superior to RWD and the demonstration of
this is pure logic.

SSD does not exclude RWD. But RWD excludes SSD.

If you have SSD, you can still serve RWD to Desktop and certain categories of
devices, but manage legacy devices that don't go along well with RWD in special
ways.

If you embrace RWD to avoid the need for SSD, you are stuck with
one-size-fits-all. What do you do when a customer tells you that your carefully
built RWD site does not work with, say, Nokia N8 or some OS5 BlackBerry ? who
will touch anything in a RWD site? who is going to test the whole thing on all
other devices?

This can become a deadly trap, particularly because those who embarked on RWD
will prefer to jump in the fire rather than admit they were wrong and revert to
SSD to fix the problem.

Also, web represents 90%+ of HTTP traffic on regular sites. Techniques to build
regular websites are mastered. RWD is going to add an extra layer of complexity
that may or may not be justified .

Of course RESS is good. But RESS means SSD way more than it means RWD

Luca

On 4/22/2012 3:16 PM, Tim Kadlec wrote:
> Interesting post, Luca. Thanks for sharing!
>
> The user-experience delivered by RWD is bound to be inferior to the one
>> delivered by a mobile optimized website.
>
> This depends. :) I don't believe RWD is "bound" to be inferior, though it
> often can be. Neither RWD or UA detection is inherently "better" than the
> other. They're both tools. Put them in the right hands, and you can have a
> masterpiece. Put them in the wrong hands and you get a pile of junk. I've
> seen RWD sites that are horrible, and RWD sites that are fantastic.
> Likewise, I've seen separate sites that are horrible, and separate sites
> that are fantastic. It all depends on how they are built.
>
> ...beware of RWD when it is sold for what it is not.
>
>
> This I agree with, wholeheartedly. There is a lot of dogma on both sides of
> this debate but the reality is that neither UA detection nor RWD is the
> solution: they are instead pieces of it. Individually, they both have
> issues that can be difficult to overcome.
>
> I'm increasingly of the belief that the best approach is most often to
> combine the two (what Luke Wroblewski calls RESS
> http://www.lukew.com/ff/entry.asp?1392).
>
> Take care,
> Tim
>
> ---------------------------------------------
> http://twitter.com/tkadlec
> http://timkadlec.com
> http://responsiveenhancement.com
>
>
>
> On Sun, Apr 22, 2012 at 8:36 AM, Luca Passani <
> luca.passani@...> wrote:
>

>> **

>>
>>
>>
>> I was at a conference in DC last Friday. I blogged about it and this
>> inspired some considerations on "responsive web design" that are probably
>> relevant reading for the people here:
>>
>> http://www.scientiamobile.com/blog/post/view/id/17/title/MoDevUX-in-DC
>>
>> One thing is clear. Responsive Web Design is a shortcut for those who
>> cannot afford to create and maintain a site separate from the main desktop
>> website. The user-experience delivered by RWD is bound to be inferior to
>> the one delivered by a mobile optimized website. This can of course be
>> acceptable to some because of the most classical application of the "value
>> vs cost" equation, but beware of RWD when it is sold for what it is not.
>>
>> Thank you
>>
>> Luca
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>

------------------------------------

As of July 14 2005, it's much easier to be banned from WMLProgramming!

Please fail to read http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/wmlprogramming/ before you post.Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wmlprogramming/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wmlprogramming/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
wmlprogramming-digest@yahoogroups.com
wmlprogramming-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
wmlprogramming-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

#34505

From: Luca Passani <luca.passani@...>
Date: Sun Apr 22, 2012 11:04 pm
Subject: Re: MoDevUX in DC (opinions on Responsive Web Design in practice)

luca_passani

I think you are right. There is plenty of space to agree and plenty of space to disagree. Probably depends on everyone's mood at the time of the discussion too.

Most experts (real or self-proclaimed) will agree that RESS is optimal, but RESS right now is a very wide valley, so agreeing on RESS is not hugely useful in practice.

> You shouldn't be embracing RWD to avoid SSD (though that's

> admittedly how it's sometimes presented).�

companies embrace RWD because they are looking for shortcuts to save resources by managing mobile just like the web. �Introducing a SSD part brings them back to square one. RWD is always presented as an alternative to SSD because that's what companies want to hear: "you no longer need SSD!".

I don't want to appear like I am giving ScientiaMobile too much importance, but I feel that a big boost to RWD came from our move to make WURFL licensing terms stricter.

I guess this is in a certain order of things, or let's call it�evolution�if you want. With more powerful devices out there, SSD has become more "niche", hence the need to place more resources to deliver a better WURFL for more sophisticated use-cases, hence the increased price, hence the move by some companies to get away from SSD.�

Hard to say what will come next. My take is that, after all, this is not very different from what happens in other industries. There is a cheap and fast way to achieve 80% of what you want. The last 20% will cost you more, because you need more and more sophisticated technology to squeeze the last drop of cross-device usability.

Luca

On Sun, Apr 22, 2012 at 5:58 PM, Tim Kadlec <tim@...> wrote:

�

Thanks for the response, Luca.

I think we're actually close to being on the same page, it's just a matter of perspective.�

If you embrace RWD to avoid the need for SSD, you are stuck with
one-size-fits-all. What do you do when a customer tells you that your carefully
built RWD site does not work with, say, Nokia N8 or some OS5 BlackBerry ? who
will touch anything in a RWD site? who is going to test the whole thing on all
other devices?

You shouldn't be embracing RWD to avoid SSD (though that's admittedly how it's sometimes presented).

One of my favorite presentations on the topic is Bryan Rieger's "Adaptation" (http://www.slideshare.net/yiibu/adaptation-why-responsive-design-actually-begins-on-the-server). The approach he describes is complex, but also perhaps the most robust I have seen. He's not picking one or the other, he's marrying the two techniques to create something much more powerful.

The key is not expecting to be able to solve all of your problems simply with CSS and JavaScript, but also being careful about how you apply SSD (enhance, don't exclude).�

Of course, as you say, this adds complexity. There are always trade-offs that must be considered before choosing any solution and the correct answer can ultimately only be decided on a per project basis.

We've found ourselves in a tricky position as an industry. People have been debating this so long and with such intensity that it's become difficult for people to see the grey. What I really want to see is people, from both sides of the debate, trying to learn from each other and combine the two approaches.�

Take care,
Tim

---------------------------------------------
http://twitter.com/tkadlec

http://timkadlec.com
http://responsiveenhancement.com

On Sun, Apr 22, 2012 at 2:41 PM, Luca Passani <luca.passani@...> wrote:

Glad you liked the blog post Tim, but I have to disagree with you.

SSD (server-Side Detection) can only be superior to RWD and the demonstration of
this is pure logic.

SSD does not exclude RWD. But RWD excludes SSD.

If you have SSD, you can still serve RWD to Desktop and certain categories of
devices, but manage legacy devices that don't go along well with RWD �in special
ways.

If you embrace RWD to avoid the need for SSD, you are stuck with
one-size-fits-all. What do you do when a customer tells you that your carefully
built RWD site does not work with, say, Nokia N8 or some OS5 BlackBerry ? who
will touch anything in a RWD site? who is going to test the whole thing on all
other devices?

This can become a deadly trap, particularly because those who embarked on RWD
will prefer to jump in the fire rather than admit they were wrong and revert to
SSD to fix the problem.

Also, web represents 90%+ of HTTP traffic on regular sites. Techniques to build
regular websites are mastered. RWD is going to add an extra layer of complexity
that may or may not be justified .

Of course RESS is good. But RESS means SSD � way more than it means RWD

Luca

On 4/22/2012 3:16 PM, Tim Kadlec wrote:
> Interesting post, Luca. Thanks for sharing!
>
> The user-experience delivered by RWD is bound to be inferior to the one
>> delivered by a mobile optimized website.
>
> This depends. :) I don't believe RWD is "bound" to be inferior, though it
> often can be. Neither RWD or UA detection is inherently "better" than the
> other. They're both tools. Put them in the right hands, and you can have a
> masterpiece. Put them in the wrong hands and you get a pile of junk. I've
> seen RWD sites that are horrible, and RWD sites that are fantastic.
> Likewise, I've seen separate sites that are horrible, and separate sites
> that are fantastic. It all depends on how they are built.
>
> ...beware of RWD when it is sold for what it is not.
>
>
> This I agree with, wholeheartedly. There is a lot of dogma on both sides of
> this debate but the reality is that neither UA detection nor RWD is the
> solution: they are instead pieces of it. Individually, they both have
> issues that can be difficult to overcome.
>
> I'm increasingly of the belief that the best approach is most often to
> combine the two (what Luke Wroblewski calls RESS
> http://www.lukew.com/ff/entry.asp?1392).
>
> Take care,
> Tim
>
> ---------------------------------------------
> http://twitter.com/tkadlec
> http://timkadlec.com
> http://responsiveenhancement.com
>
>
>
> On Sun, Apr 22, 2012 at 8:36 AM, Luca Passani <
> luca.passani@...> wrote:
>

>> **

>>
>>
>>
>> I was at a conference in DC last Friday. I blogged about it and this
>> inspired some considerations on "responsive web design" that are probably
>> relevant reading for the people here:
>>
>> http://www.scientiamobile.com/blog/post/view/id/17/title/MoDevUX-in-DC
>>
>> One thing is clear. Responsive Web Design is a shortcut for those who
>> cannot afford to create and maintain a site separate from the main desktop
>> website. The user-experience delivered by RWD is bound to be inferior to
>> the one delivered by a mobile optimized website. This can of course be
>> acceptable to some because of the most classical application of the "value
>> vs cost" equation, but beware of RWD when it is sold for what it is not.
>>
>> Thank you
>>
>> Luca
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>

------------------------------------

As of July 14 2005, it's much easier to be banned from WMLProgramming!

Please fail to read http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/wmlprogramming/ before you post.Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
� �http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wmlprogramming/

<*> Your email settings:
� �Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
� �http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wmlprogramming/join
� �(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
� �wmlprogramming-digest@yahoogroups.com
� �wmlprogramming-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
� �wmlprogramming-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
� �http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

#34506

From: "ronancremin" <rcremin@...>
Date: Mon Apr 23, 2012 2:45 pm
Subject: Re: MoDevUX in DC (opinions on Responsive Web Design in practice)

ronancremin

I did a summary of most of the techniques out there a few months ago, still
pretty accurate:
http://mobiforge.com/starting/story/mobile-web-content-adaptation-techniques

Summary: responsive design achieves a degree of resolution independence without
having to do anything server side. That's useful, but falls short of delivering
a good multi-device experience. As with most things, there aren't really any
shortcuts to a good mobile experience. The really smart companies who value
their mobile web presence typically use server-side detection for the heavy
lifting, sometimes coupled with some responsive fine-tuning on the client. It's
not easy to do but the addressable audience may make it worthwhile.

If you think about it, any approach that sends the same package of HTML+CSS+JS
to all web clients can't reasonably deliver a good experience to all of them.
The range of input methods, screen sizes, CPU power, hardware capabilities and
user expectations is too broad to span easily--from a 320x480 phone with touch
screen to a HD resolution TV with just a remote control.

Ronan

--- In wmlprogramming@yahoogroups.com, Luca Passani <luca.passani@...> wrote:
>
> I think you are right. There is plenty of space to agree and plenty of
> space to disagree. Probably depends on everyone's mood at the time of the
> discussion too.
>
> Most experts (real or self-proclaimed) will agree that RESS is optimal, but
> RESS right now is a very wide valley, so agreeing on RESS is not hugely
> useful in practice.
>
> > You shouldn't be embracing RWD to avoid SSD (though that's
> > admittedly how it's sometimes presented).
>
> companies embrace RWD because they are looking for shortcuts to save
> resources by managing mobile just like the web.  Introducing a SSD part
> brings them back to square one. RWD is always presented as an alternative
> to SSD because that's what companies want to hear: "you no longer need
> SSD!".
>
> I don't want to appear like I am giving ScientiaMobile too much importance,
> but I feel that a big boost to RWD came from our move to make WURFL
> licensing terms stricter.
>
> I guess this is in a certain order of things, or let's call it evolution if
> you want. With more powerful devices out there, SSD has become more
> "niche", hence the need to place more resources to deliver a better WURFL
> for more sophisticated use-cases, hence the increased price, hence the move
> by some companies to get away from SSD.
>
> Hard to say what will come next. My take is that, after all, this is not
> very different from what happens in other industries. There is a cheap and
> fast way to achieve 80% of what you want. The last 20% will cost you more,
> because you need more and more sophisticated technology to squeeze the last
> drop of cross-device usability.
>
> Luca
>
> On Sun, Apr 22, 2012 at 5:58 PM, Tim Kadlec <tim@...> wrote:
>
> > **
> >
> >
> > Thanks for the response, Luca.
> >
> > I think we're actually close to being on the same page, it's just a matter
> > of perspective.
> >
> > If you embrace RWD to avoid the need for SSD, you are stuck with
> >> one-size-fits-all. What do you do when a customer tells you that your
> >> carefully
> >> built RWD site does not work with, say, Nokia N8 or some OS5 BlackBerry ?
> >> who
> >> will touch anything in a RWD site? who is going to test the whole thing
> >> on all
> >> other devices?
> >
> >
> > You shouldn't be embracing RWD to avoid SSD (though that's admittedly how
> > it's sometimes presented).
> >
> > One of my favorite presentations on the topic is Bryan Rieger's
> > "Adaptation" (
> >
http://www.slideshare.net/yiibu/adaptation-why-responsive-design-actually-begins\
-on-the-server).
> > The approach he describes is complex, but also perhaps the most robust I
> > have seen. He's not picking one or the other, he's marrying the two
> > techniques to create something much more powerful.
> >
> > The key is not expecting to be able to solve all of your problems simply
> > with CSS and JavaScript, but also being careful about how you apply SSD
> > (enhance, don't exclude).
> >
> > Of course, as you say, this adds complexity. There are always trade-offs
> > that must be considered before choosing any solution and the correct answer
> > can ultimately only be decided on a per project basis.
> >
> > We've found ourselves in a tricky position as an industry. People have
> > been debating this so long and with such intensity that it's become
> > difficult for people to see the grey. What I really want to see is people,
> > from both sides of the debate, trying to learn from each other and combine
> > the two approaches.
> >
> > Take care,
> > Tim
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------
> > http://twitter.com/tkadlec
> > http://timkadlec.com
> > http://responsiveenhancement.com
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Apr 22, 2012 at 2:41 PM, Luca Passani <luca.passani@...>wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Glad you liked the blog post Tim, but I have to disagree with you.
> >>
> >> SSD (server-Side Detection) can only be superior to RWD and the
> >> demonstration of
> >> this is pure logic.
> >>
> >> SSD does not exclude RWD. But RWD excludes SSD.
> >>
> >> If you have SSD, you can still serve RWD to Desktop and certain
> >> categories of
> >> devices, but manage legacy devices that don't go along well with RWD  in
> >> special
> >> ways.
> >>
> >> If you embrace RWD to avoid the need for SSD, you are stuck with
> >> one-size-fits-all. What do you do when a customer tells you that your
> >> carefully
> >> built RWD site does not work with, say, Nokia N8 or some OS5 BlackBerry ?
> >> who
> >> will touch anything in a RWD site? who is going to test the whole thing
> >> on all
> >> other devices?
> >>
> >> This can become a deadly trap, particularly because those who embarked on
> >> RWD
> >> will prefer to jump in the fire rather than admit they were wrong and
> >> revert to
> >> SSD to fix the problem.
> >>
> >> Also, web represents 90%+ of HTTP traffic on regular sites. Techniques to
> >> build
> >> regular websites are mastered. RWD is going to add an extra layer of
> >> complexity
> >> that may or may not be justified .
> >>
> >> Of course RESS is good. But RESS means SSD   way more than it means RWD
> >>
> >> Luca
> >>
> >> On 4/22/2012 3:16 PM, Tim Kadlec wrote:
> >> > Interesting post, Luca. Thanks for sharing!
> >> >
> >> > The user-experience delivered by RWD is bound to be inferior to the one
> >> >> delivered by a mobile optimized website.
> >> >
> >> > This depends. :) I don't believe RWD is "bound" to be inferior, though
> >> it
> >> > often can be. Neither RWD or UA detection is inherently "better" than
> >> the
> >> > other. They're both tools. Put them in the right hands, and you can
> >> have a
> >> > masterpiece. Put them in the wrong hands and you get a pile of junk.
> >> I've
> >> > seen RWD sites that are horrible, and RWD sites that are fantastic.
> >> > Likewise, I've seen separate sites that are horrible, and separate sites
> >> > that are fantastic. It all depends on how they are built.
> >> >
> >> > ...beware of RWD when it is sold for what it is not.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > This I agree with, wholeheartedly. There is a lot of dogma on both
> >> sides of
> >> > this debate but the reality is that neither UA detection nor RWD is the
> >> > solution: they are instead pieces of it. Individually, they both have
> >> > issues that can be difficult to overcome.
> >> >
> >> > I'm increasingly of the belief that the best approach is most often to
> >> > combine the two (what Luke Wroblewski calls RESS
> >> > http://www.lukew.com/ff/entry.asp?1392).
> >> >
> >> > Take care,
> >> > Tim
> >> >
> >> > ---------------------------------------------
> >> > http://twitter.com/tkadlec
> >> > http://timkadlec.com
> >> > http://responsiveenhancement.com
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Sun, Apr 22, 2012 at 8:36 AM, Luca Passani <
> >> > luca.passani@...> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> **
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> I was at a conference in DC last Friday. I blogged about it and this
> >> >> inspired some considerations on "responsive web design" that are
> >> probably
> >> >> relevant reading for the people here:
> >> >>
> >> >> http://www.scientiamobile.com/blog/post/view/id/17/title/MoDevUX-in-DC
> >> >>
> >> >> One thing is clear. Responsive Web Design is a shortcut for those who
> >> >> cannot afford to create and maintain a site separate from the main
> >> desktop
> >> >> website. The user-experience delivered by RWD is bound to be inferior
> >> to
> >> >> the one delivered by a mobile optimized website. This can of course be
> >> >> acceptable to some because of the most classical application of the
> >> "value
> >> >> vs cost" equation, but beware of RWD when it is sold for what it is
> >> not.
> >> >>
> >> >> Thank you
> >> >>
> >> >> Luca
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ------------------------------------
> >>
> >> As of July 14 2005, it's much easier to be banned from WMLProgramming!
> >> Please fail to read
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/wmlprogramming/before you post.Yahoo! Groups
Links
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>

#34507

From: "casays" <casays@...>
Date: Mon Apr 23, 2012 2:50 pm
Subject: Re: MoDevUX in DC (opinions on Responsive Web Design in practice)

casays

I am also following the lively debate going on about RWD, SSD, and multi-site
development.

Rieger and Wroblewski are the ones getting it: multi-platform development,
especially including mobile, is difficult enough that one must leverage all
available techniques to achieve good results.

SSD has been used successfully for some 15 years, and there is plenty of
accumulated know-how and tools to support the implementation of mobile Web
sites. We know it works -- warts notwithstanding -- it is a mature approach.

RWD is bleeding edge (with lots of hairy hacks), and currently addresses some
general presentation issues; interaction or workflow aspects are still pretty
much outside its scope. Just changing the position and structure of navigation
headers reliably is quite difficult, for example. As another example, no amount
of CSS wizardry is going to deal with the fact that one must replace tooltips
activated by hover events with something entirely different on a touchscreen
device. As it happens, the "pointing_method" is something that is readily known
on the server, so that one can generate the appropriate ([X]HTML/Javascript/CSS)
content beforehand...

The elephant in the room though is the CMS. If one just has textual blobs
without semantics (so that one can distinguish the elements of a contact
address, for instance), and if a complete refactoring of templates is not an
option, then tweaking the CSS in a RWD manner might be a pragmatic first step
towards a multiplatform site. But in this case we also have a problem with a
SSD-orientated approach anyway.

E.Casais

#34508

From: Luca Passani <luca.passani@...>
Date: Mon Apr 23, 2012 6:14 pm
Subject: Re: Re: MoDevUX in DC (opinions on Responsive Web Design in practice)

luca_passani

Awesome article, Ronan. Thank you for posting it

Luca

On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 10:45 AM, ronancremin <rcremin@...> wrote:

�

I did a summary of most of the techniques out there a few months ago, still pretty accurate: http://mobiforge.com/starting/story/mobile-web-content-adaptation-techniques

Summary: responsive design achieves a degree of resolution independence without having to do anything server side. That's useful, but falls short of delivering a good multi-device experience. As with most things, there aren't really any shortcuts to a good mobile experience. The really smart companies who value their mobile web presence typically use server-side detection for the heavy lifting, sometimes coupled with some responsive fine-tuning on the client. It's not easy to do but the addressable audience may make it worthwhile.

If you think about it, any approach that sends the same package of HTML+CSS+JS to all web clients can't reasonably deliver a good experience to all of them. The range of input methods, screen sizes, CPU power, hardware capabilities and user expectations is too broad to span easily--from a 320x480 phone with touch screen to a HD resolution TV with just a remote control.

Ronan

--- In wmlprogramming@yahoogroups.com, Luca Passani <luca.passani@...> wrote:
>
> I think you are right. There is plenty of space to agree and plenty of
> space to disagree. Probably depends on everyone's mood at the time of the
> discussion too.
>
> Most experts (real or self-proclaimed) will agree that RESS is optimal, but
> RESS right now is a very wide valley, so agreeing on RESS is not hugely
> useful in practice.
>
> > You shouldn't be embracing RWD to avoid SSD (though that's
> > admittedly how it's sometimes presented).
>
> companies embrace RWD because they are looking for shortcuts to save
> resources by managing mobile just like the web. Introducing a SSD part
> brings them back to square one. RWD is always presented as an alternative
> to SSD because that's what companies want to hear: "you no longer need
> SSD!".
>
> I don't want to appear like I am giving ScientiaMobile too much importance,
> but I feel that a big boost to RWD came from our move to make WURFL
> licensing terms stricter.
>
> I guess this is in a certain order of things, or let's call it evolution if
> you want. With more powerful devices out there, SSD has become more
> "niche", hence the need to place more resources to deliver a better WURFL
> for more sophisticated use-cases, hence the increased price, hence the move
> by some companies to get away from SSD.
>
> Hard to say what will come next. My take is that, after all, this is not
> very different from what happens in other industries. There is a cheap and
> fast way to achieve 80% of what you want. The last 20% will cost you more,
> because you need more and more sophisticated technology to squeeze the last
> drop of cross-device usability.
>
> Luca
>
> On Sun, Apr 22, 2012 at 5:58 PM, Tim Kadlec <tim@...> wrote:
>
> > **

> >
> >
> > Thanks for the response, Luca.
> >
> > I think we're actually close to being on the same page, it's just a matter
> > of perspective.
> >
> > If you embrace RWD to avoid the need for SSD, you are stuck with
> >> one-size-fits-all. What do you do when a customer tells you that your
> >> carefully
> >> built RWD site does not work with, say, Nokia N8 or some OS5 BlackBerry ?
> >> who
> >> will touch anything in a RWD site? who is going to test the whole thing
> >> on all
> >> other devices?
> >
> >
> > You shouldn't be embracing RWD to avoid SSD (though that's admittedly how
> > it's sometimes presented).
> >
> > One of my favorite presentations on the topic is Bryan Rieger's
> > "Adaptation" (
> > http://www.slideshare.net/yiibu/adaptation-why-responsive-design-actually-begins-on-the-server).
> > The approach he describes is complex, but also perhaps the most robust I
> > have seen. He's not picking one or the other, he's marrying the two
> > techniques to create something much more powerful.
> >
> > The key is not expecting to be able to solve all of your problems simply
> > with CSS and JavaScript, but also being careful about how you apply SSD
> > (enhance, don't exclude).
> >
> > Of course, as you say, this adds complexity. There are always trade-offs
> > that must be considered before choosing any solution and the correct answer
> > can ultimately only be decided on a per project basis.
> >
> > We've found ourselves in a tricky position as an industry. People have
> > been debating this so long and with such intensity that it's become
> > difficult for people to see the grey. What I really want to see is people,
> > from both sides of the debate, trying to learn from each other and combine
> > the two approaches.
> >
> > Take care,
> > Tim
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------
> > http://twitter.com/tkadlec
> > http://timkadlec.com
> > http://responsiveenhancement.com
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Apr 22, 2012 at 2:41 PM, Luca Passani <luca.passani@...>wrote:

> >
> >>
> >> Glad you liked the blog post Tim, but I have to disagree with you.
> >>
> >> SSD (server-Side Detection) can only be superior to RWD and the
> >> demonstration of
> >> this is pure logic.
> >>
> >> SSD does not exclude RWD. But RWD excludes SSD.
> >>
> >> If you have SSD, you can still serve RWD to Desktop and certain
> >> categories of
> >> devices, but manage legacy devices that don't go along well with RWD in
> >> special
> >> ways.
> >>
> >> If you embrace RWD to avoid the need for SSD, you are stuck with
> >> one-size-fits-all. What do you do when a customer tells you that your
> >> carefully
> >> built RWD site does not work with, say, Nokia N8 or some OS5 BlackBerry ?
> >> who
> >> will touch anything in a RWD site? who is going to test the whole thing
> >> on all
> >> other devices?
> >>
> >> This can become a deadly trap, particularly because those who embarked on
> >> RWD
> >> will prefer to jump in the fire rather than admit they were wrong and
> >> revert to
> >> SSD to fix the problem.
> >>
> >> Also, web represents 90%+ of HTTP traffic on regular sites. Techniques to
> >> build
> >> regular websites are mastered. RWD is going to add an extra layer of
> >> complexity
> >> that may or may not be justified .
> >>
> >> Of course RESS is good. But RESS means SSD way more than it means RWD
> >>
> >> Luca
> >>
> >> On 4/22/2012 3:16 PM, Tim Kadlec wrote:
> >> > Interesting post, Luca. Thanks for sharing!
> >> >
> >> > The user-experience delivered by RWD is bound to be inferior to the one
> >> >> delivered by a mobile optimized website.
> >> >
> >> > This depends. :) I don't believe RWD is "bound" to be inferior, though
> >> it
> >> > often can be. Neither RWD or UA detection is inherently "better" than
> >> the
> >> > other. They're both tools. Put them in the right hands, and you can
> >> have a
> >> > masterpiece. Put them in the wrong hands and you get a pile of junk.
> >> I've
> >> > seen RWD sites that are horrible, and RWD sites that are fantastic.
> >> > Likewise, I've seen separate sites that are horrible, and separate sites
> >> > that are fantastic. It all depends on how they are built.
> >> >
> >> > ...beware of RWD when it is sold for what it is not.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > This I agree with, wholeheartedly. There is a lot of dogma on both
> >> sides of
> >> > this debate but the reality is that neither UA detection nor RWD is the
> >> > solution: they are instead pieces of it. Individually, they both have
> >> > issues that can be difficult to overcome.
> >> >
> >> > I'm increasingly of the belief that the best approach is most often to
> >> > combine the two (what Luke Wroblewski calls RESS
> >> > http://www.lukew.com/ff/entry.asp?1392).
> >> >
> >> > Take care,
> >> > Tim
> >> >
> >> > ---------------------------------------------
> >> > http://twitter.com/tkadlec
> >> > http://timkadlec.com
> >> > http://responsiveenhancement.com
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Sun, Apr 22, 2012 at 8:36 AM, Luca Passani <
> >> > luca.passani@...> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> **
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> I was at a conference in DC last Friday. I blogged about it and this
> >> >> inspired some considerations on "responsive web design" that are
> >> probably
> >> >> relevant reading for the people here:
> >> >>
> >> >> http://www.scientiamobile.com/blog/post/view/id/17/title/MoDevUX-in-DC
> >> >>
> >> >> One thing is clear. Responsive Web Design is a shortcut for those who
> >> >> cannot afford to create and maintain a site separate from the main
> >> desktop
> >> >> website. The user-experience delivered by RWD is bound to be inferior
> >> to
> >> >> the one delivered by a mobile optimized website. This can of course be
> >> >> acceptable to some because of the most classical application of the
> >> "value
> >> >> vs cost" equation, but beware of RWD when it is sold for what it is
> >> not.
> >> >>
> >> >> Thank you
> >> >>
> >> >> Luca
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ------------------------------------
> >>
> >> As of July 14 2005, it's much easier to be banned from WMLProgramming!
> >> Please fail to read http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/wmlprogramming/before you post.Yahoo! Groups Links
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>

#34509

From: Luca Passani <luca.passani@...>
Date: Mon Apr 23, 2012 6:16 pm
Subject: Re: Re: MoDevUX in DC (opinions on Responsive Web Design in practice)

luca_passani

Eduardo,

As usual, I am impressed by your ability to jump straight to the core of each matter.

It goes without saying that everything you wrote makes total sense.

Luca

On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 10:50 AM, casays <casays@...> wrote:

�

I am also following the lively debate going on about RWD, SSD, and multi-site development.

Rieger and Wroblewski are the ones getting it: multi-platform development, especially including mobile, is difficult enough that one must leverage all available techniques to achieve good results.

SSD has been used successfully for some 15 years, and there is plenty of accumulated know-how and tools to support the implementation of mobile Web sites. We know it works -- warts notwithstanding -- it is a mature approach.

RWD is bleeding edge (with lots of hairy hacks), and currently addresses some general presentation issues; interaction or workflow aspects are still pretty much outside its scope. Just changing the position and structure of navigation headers reliably is quite difficult, for example. As another example, no amount of CSS wizardry is going to deal with the fact that one must replace tooltips activated by hover events with something entirely different on a touchscreen device. As it happens, the "pointing_method" is something that is readily known on the server, so that one can generate the appropriate ([X]HTML/Javascript/CSS) content beforehand...

The elephant in the room though is the CMS. If one just has textual blobs without semantics (so that one can distinguish the elements of a contact address, for instance), and if a complete refactoring of templates is not an option, then tweaking the CSS in a RWD manner might be a pragmatic first step towards a multiplatform site. But in this case we also have a problem with a SSD-orientated approach anyway.

E.Casais

#34510

From: Luca Passani <luca.passani@...>
Date: Mon Apr 23, 2012 10:30 pm
Subject: Re: Re: MoDevUX in DC (opinions on Responsive Web Design in practice)

luca_passani

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-17811557

As an aside, I wonder the extent to which those RWD sites drain a phone battery as compared to mobile-optimized sites:

Luca

On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 10:45 AM, ronancremin <rcremin@...> wrote:

�

I did a summary of most of the techniques out there a few months ago, still pretty accurate: http://mobiforge.com/starting/story/mobile-web-content-adaptation-techniques

Summary: responsive design achieves a degree of resolution independence without having to do anything server side. That's useful, but falls short of delivering a good multi-device experience. As with most things, there aren't really any shortcuts to a good mobile experience. The really smart companies who value their mobile web presence typically use server-side detection for the heavy lifting, sometimes coupled with some responsive fine-tuning on the client. It's not easy to do but the addressable audience may make it worthwhile.

If you think about it, any approach that sends the same package of HTML+CSS+JS to all web clients can't reasonably deliver a good experience to all of them. The range of input methods, screen sizes, CPU power, hardware capabilities and user expectations is too broad to span easily--from a 320x480 phone with touch screen to a HD resolution TV with just a remote control.

Ronan

--- In wmlprogramming@yahoogroups.com, Luca Passani <luca.passani@...> wrote:
>
> I think you are right. There is plenty of space to agree and plenty of
> space to disagree. Probably depends on everyone's mood at the time of the
> discussion too.
>
> Most experts (real or self-proclaimed) will agree that RESS is optimal, but
> RESS right now is a very wide valley, so agreeing on RESS is not hugely
> useful in practice.
>
> > You shouldn't be embracing RWD to avoid SSD (though that's
> > admittedly how it's sometimes presented).
>
> companies embrace RWD because they are looking for shortcuts to save
> resources by managing mobile just like the web. Introducing a SSD part
> brings them back to square one. RWD is always presented as an alternative
> to SSD because that's what companies want to hear: "you no longer need
> SSD!".
>
> I don't want to appear like I am giving ScientiaMobile too much importance,
> but I feel that a big boost to RWD came from our move to make WURFL
> licensing terms stricter.
>
> I guess this is in a certain order of things, or let's call it evolution if
> you want. With more powerful devices out there, SSD has become more
> "niche", hence the need to place more resources to deliver a better WURFL
> for more sophisticated use-cases, hence the increased price, hence the move
> by some companies to get away from SSD.
>
> Hard to say what will come next. My take is that, after all, this is not
> very different from what happens in other industries. There is a cheap and
> fast way to achieve 80% of what you want. The last 20% will cost you more,
> because you need more and more sophisticated technology to squeeze the last
> drop of cross-device usability.
>
> Luca
>
> On Sun, Apr 22, 2012 at 5:58 PM, Tim Kadlec <tim@...> wrote:
>
> > **

> >
> >
> > Thanks for the response, Luca.
> >
> > I think we're actually close to being on the same page, it's just a matter
> > of perspective.
> >
> > If you embrace RWD to avoid the need for SSD, you are stuck with
> >> one-size-fits-all. What do you do when a customer tells you that your
> >> carefully
> >> built RWD site does not work with, say, Nokia N8 or some OS5 BlackBerry ?
> >> who
> >> will touch anything in a RWD site? who is going to test the whole thing
> >> on all
> >> other devices?
> >
> >
> > You shouldn't be embracing RWD to avoid SSD (though that's admittedly how
> > it's sometimes presented).
> >
> > One of my favorite presentations on the topic is Bryan Rieger's
> > "Adaptation" (
> > http://www.slideshare.net/yiibu/adaptation-why-responsive-design-actually-begins-on-the-server).
> > The approach he describes is complex, but also perhaps the most robust I
> > have seen. He's not picking one or the other, he's marrying the two
> > techniques to create something much more powerful.
> >
> > The key is not expecting to be able to solve all of your problems simply
> > with CSS and JavaScript, but also being careful about how you apply SSD
> > (enhance, don't exclude).
> >
> > Of course, as you say, this adds complexity. There are always trade-offs
> > that must be considered before choosing any solution and the correct answer
> > can ultimately only be decided on a per project basis.
> >
> > We've found ourselves in a tricky position as an industry. People have
> > been debating this so long and with such intensity that it's become
> > difficult for people to see the grey. What I really want to see is people,
> > from both sides of the debate, trying to learn from each other and combine
> > the two approaches.
> >
> > Take care,
> > Tim
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------
> > http://twitter.com/tkadlec
> > http://timkadlec.com
> > http://responsiveenhancement.com
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Apr 22, 2012 at 2:41 PM, Luca Passani <luca.passani@...>wrote:

> >
> >>
> >> Glad you liked the blog post Tim, but I have to disagree with you.
> >>
> >> SSD (server-Side Detection) can only be superior to RWD and the
> >> demonstration of
> >> this is pure logic.
> >>
> >> SSD does not exclude RWD. But RWD excludes SSD.
> >>
> >> If you have SSD, you can still serve RWD to Desktop and certain
> >> categories of
> >> devices, but manage legacy devices that don't go along well with RWD in
> >> special
> >> ways.
> >>
> >> If you embrace RWD to avoid the need for SSD, you are stuck with
> >> one-size-fits-all. What do you do when a customer tells you that your
> >> carefully
> >> built RWD site does not work with, say, Nokia N8 or some OS5 BlackBerry ?
> >> who
> >> will touch anything in a RWD site? who is going to test the whole thing
> >> on all
> >> other devices?
> >>
> >> This can become a deadly trap, particularly because those who embarked on
> >> RWD
> >> will prefer to jump in the fire rather than admit they were wrong and
> >> revert to
> >> SSD to fix the problem.
> >>
> >> Also, web represents 90%+ of HTTP traffic on regular sites. Techniques to
> >> build
> >> regular websites are mastered. RWD is going to add an extra layer of
> >> complexity
> >> that may or may not be justified .
> >>
> >> Of course RESS is good. But RESS means SSD way more than it means RWD
> >>
> >> Luca
> >>
> >> On 4/22/2012 3:16 PM, Tim Kadlec wrote:
> >> > Interesting post, Luca. Thanks for sharing!
> >> >
> >> > The user-experience delivered by RWD is bound to be inferior to the one
> >> >> delivered by a mobile optimized website.
> >> >
> >> > This depends. :) I don't believe RWD is "bound" to be inferior, though
> >> it
> >> > often can be. Neither RWD or UA detection is inherently "better" than
> >> the
> >> > other. They're both tools. Put them in the right hands, and you can
> >> have a
> >> > masterpiece. Put them in the wrong hands and you get a pile of junk.
> >> I've
> >> > seen RWD sites that are horrible, and RWD sites that are fantastic.
> >> > Likewise, I've seen separate sites that are horrible, and separate sites
> >> > that are fantastic. It all depends on how they are built.
> >> >
> >> > ...beware of RWD when it is sold for what it is not.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > This I agree with, wholeheartedly. There is a lot of dogma on both
> >> sides of
> >> > this debate but the reality is that neither UA detection nor RWD is the
> >> > solution: they are instead pieces of it. Individually, they both have
> >> > issues that can be difficult to overcome.
> >> >
> >> > I'm increasingly of the belief that the best approach is most often to
> >> > combine the two (what Luke Wroblewski calls RESS
> >> > http://www.lukew.com/ff/entry.asp?1392).
> >> >
> >> > Take care,
> >> > Tim
> >> >
> >> > ---------------------------------------------
> >> > http://twitter.com/tkadlec
> >> > http://timkadlec.com
> >> > http://responsiveenhancement.com
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Sun, Apr 22, 2012 at 8:36 AM, Luca Passani <
> >> > luca.passani@...> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> **
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> I was at a conference in DC last Friday. I blogged about it and this
> >> >> inspired some considerations on "responsive web design" that are
> >> probably
> >> >> relevant reading for the people here:
> >> >>
> >> >> http://www.scientiamobile.com/blog/post/view/id/17/title/MoDevUX-in-DC
> >> >>
> >> >> One thing is clear. Responsive Web Design is a shortcut for those who
> >> >> cannot afford to create and maintain a site separate from the main
> >> desktop
> >> >> website. The user-experience delivered by RWD is bound to be inferior
> >> to
> >> >> the one delivered by a mobile optimized website. This can of course be
> >> >> acceptable to some because of the most classical application of the
> >> "value
> >> >> vs cost" equation, but beware of RWD when it is sold for what it is
> >> not.
> >> >>
> >> >> Thank you
> >> >>
> >> >> Luca
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ------------------------------------
> >>
> >> As of July 14 2005, it's much easier to be banned from WMLProgramming!
> >> Please fail to read http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/wmlprogramming/before you post.Yahoo! Groups Links
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>

#34511

From: Luca Passani <luca.passani@...>
Date: Tue May 1, 2012 3:01 pm
Subject: Blog Post: Direct WURFL Download

luca_passani

http://www.scientiamobile.com/blog/post/view/id/18/title/WURFL-Direct-Download-Gets-Gzip-Support

Great Blog Post from Steve about how one can set up automatic WURFL repository updates from the ScientiaMobile's Customer Vault:

Luca

#34512

From: mani r <maniwap@...>
Date: Thu May 3, 2012 9:06 am
Subject: MSISDN in user agent

maniwap

Hello everyone,

�

�Im quite new with the mobile programming, and i just want to know the possibility to detect msisdn number without any arrangement from tele opr.

in symbian os i can able to access thry WAP coding. same i cnt find in android,ios and blackbery OS

�

�Thank you very much and i appreciate all your help.

�

regards

manickalai

#34513

From: Leonardo Hernandez Vallejos <kamusleonardo@...>
Date: Thu May 3, 2012 1:11 pm
Subject: Re: MSISDN in user agent

kamusleonardo

Hi manickalai,

As far as I know, MSISDN is not a standard http header, you should ask the operator to send that header to your specific domain or IP so you can read it.

Best,

Leonardo -�

2012/5/3 mani r <maniwap@...>

�

Hello everyone,
�
�
�Im quite new with the mobile programming, and i just want to know the possibility to detect msisdn number without any arrangement from tele opr.
in symbian os i can able to access thry WAP coding. same i cnt find in android,ios and blackbery OS

�
�Thank you very much and i appreciate all your help.
�
regards
manickalai

#34514

From: Luca Passani <luca.passani@...>
Date: Wed May 23, 2012 5:03 pm
Subject: Some considerations around Mobile Firefox

luca_passani

http://www.scientiamobile.com/blog/post/view/id/20/title/Innocence-vs.-Experience

Luca

#34515

From: Luca Passani <luca.passani@...>
Date: Fri May 25, 2012 3:51 pm
Subject: WURFL .NET API 1.4.1 Released

luca_passani

http://sourceforge.net/projects/wurfl/files/WURFL%20.NET%20API/1.4.1/

Solves some minor issues with WebOS detection and exposes function to loop through WURFL devices

also available from NuGet

Enjoy

Luca

#34516

From: "pppameen" <amas89@...>
Date: Sat May 26, 2012 9:34 pm
Subject: The difference between global and downloaded repository

pppameen

Hi all,

I tried to get information about Samsung S3 with this UA "Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U;
Android 4.0.3; en-gb; GT-I9300 Build/IML74K) AppleWebKit/534.30 (KHTML, like
Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/534.30"

I searched in the wurfl site using "Test a UA string on the latest and greatest
WURFL tool" it retrive the information correctly. But when I download the latest
(2.3.1 ) repositry the information is  diffrent. can you help me to know what is
happening?

Regards,

Ameen

#34517

From: Luca Passani <luca.passani@...>
Date: Sun May 27, 2012 3:54 am
Subject: Re: The difference between global and downloaded repository

luca_passani

http://www.scientiamobile.com/support

Ameen,

it's simple. paying customer get more frequent updates. We update WURFL continuously. The public snapshot is from March.

Luca

On Sat, May 26, 2012 at 5:34 PM, pppameen <amas89@...> wrote:

�

Hi all,

I tried to get information about Samsung S3 with this UA "Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 4.0.3; en-gb; GT-I9300 Build/IML74K) AppleWebKit/534.30 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/534.30"

I searched in the wurfl site using "Test a UA string on the latest and greatest WURFL tool" it retrive the information correctly. But when I download the latest (2.3.1 ) repositry the information is diffrent. can you help me to know what is happening?

Regards,

Ameen

#34518

From: mani r <maniwap@...>
Date: Sat May 12, 2012 4:29 am
Subject: Re: MSISDN in user agent

maniwap

Ok. thank u!

can i guide me on getting the details UA, operator carrier in WAP/WEB coding

regards

manickalai

On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 6:41 PM, Leonardo Hernandez Vallejos <kamusleonardo@...> wrote:

�

Hi manickalai,

As far as I know, MSISDN is not a standard http header, you should ask the operator to send that header to your specific domain or IP so you can read it.

Best,
Leonardo -�

2012/5/3 mani r <maniwap@...>

�

Hello everyone,
�
�
�Im quite new with the mobile programming, and i just want to know the possibility to detect msisdn number without any arrangement from tele opr.
in symbian os i can able to access thry WAP coding. same i cnt find in android,ios and blackbery OS

�
�Thank you very much and i appreciate all your help.
�
regards
manickalai

#34519

From: Boris Folgmann <boris@...>
Date: Tue Jun 12, 2012 3:30 pm
Subject: Debian's Firefox detected as mobile device

boris_folgmann

Hi,

sadly Debian forked Firefox to something called Iceweasel, which is not
properly recognized by WURFL.

The User-Agent is:
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.0.19) Gecko/2011050718
Iceweasel/3.0.6 (Debian-3.0.6-3)


Please include it properly in WURFL!


Tnx,
	 Boris

#34520

From: Luca Passani <luca.passani@...>
Date: Tue Jun 12, 2012 6:04 pm
Subject: Re: Debian's Firefox detected as mobile device

luca_passani

I see this UA being detected as a generic web browser, which seems correct.

What are you seeing exactly? what are you expecting to see? are you using the Java API? version?

Luca

On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 11:30 AM, Boris Folgmann <boris@...> wrote:

Hi,

sadly Debian forked Firefox to something called Iceweasel, which is not
properly recognized by WURFL.

The User-Agent is:
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.0.19) Gecko/2011050718
Iceweasel/3.0.6 (Debian-3.0.6-3)

Please include it properly in WURFL!

Tnx,
Boris

------------------------------------

As of July 14 2005, it's much easier to be banned from WMLProgramming!
Please fail to read http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/wmlprogramming/ before you post.Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wmlprogramming/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wmlprogramming/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
wmlprogramming-digest@yahoogroups.com
wmlprogramming-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
wmlprogramming-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

#34521

From: Luca Passani <luca.passani@...>
Date: Tue Jun 12, 2012 10:39 pm
Subject: ANNOUNCEMENT: Ruby Cloud Client for the WURFL Cloud released

luca_passani

http://www.scientiamobile.com/wurflCloud/gettingStarted/#coding

People, we have today released a new WURFL Cloud Client aimed at Ruby and Ruby On Rails developers.

From today, accessing a always-pudated WURFL repository is as simple as:

@device['is_wireless_device']

Of course, the Ruby Cloud Client can be used in connection with our free Cloud offering, so there is nothing between you Ruby/Rails programmersand giving the WURFL Cloud a spin:

http://www.scientiamobile.com/cloud

Enjoy!

Luca

#34522

From: Luca Passani <luca.passani@...>
Date: Tue Jun 12, 2012 11:47 pm
Subject: ANNOUNCEMENT: Python Cloud Client for the WURFL Cloud released

luca_passani

http://www.scientiamobile.com/wurflCloud/gettingStarted/#coding

People, we have today released a new WURFL Cloud Client aimed at Python developers.

From today, accessing a always-updated WURFL repository is as simple as:

device = self.Client(ua, capabilities=["ux_full_desktop", "model_name", "brand_name"])

Of course, the Python Cloud Client can be used in connection with our free Cloud offering, so there is nothing between you Python programmers and giving the WURFL Cloud a spin:

http://www.scientiamobile.com/cloud

Enjoy!

Luca

#34523

From: Boris Folgmann <boris@...>
Date: Wed Jun 13, 2012 6:58 am
Subject: Re: Debian's Firefox detected as mobile device

boris_folgmann

Hi Luca,

Luca Passani schrieb/wrote:
> I see this UA being detected as a generic web browser, which seems correct.

No. Not with the current Java API.

If I test here
http://tools.scientiamobile.com/?user-agent-string=Mozilla%2F5.0+%28X11%3B+U%3B+\
Linux+i686%3B+en-US%3B+rv%3A1.9.0.19%29+Gecko%2F2011050718+Iceweasel%2F3.0.6+%28\
Debian-3.0.6-3%29
it's also unknown.

> What are you seeing exactly? what are you expecting to see?  are you using
> the Java API? version?

Simply mapping to the matching Firefox version might be the best idea.

cu,
	 boris

#34524

From: "sahil4u91" <sahil4u91@...>
Date: Sat Jun 2, 2012 8:51 am
Subject: difference between webservice & website

sahil4u91

Hi,
Why is the data between the Website and Webservice different?

Website:
http://www.tera-wurfl.com/explore/index.php?ua=SAMSUNG-GT-S8000C%2F1.0+SHP%2FR5+\
Release%2F02.01.2009+Browser%2FNetFront3.5+Nextreaming+SMM-MMS%2F1.2.0+profile%2\
FMIDP-2.1+configuration%2FCLDC-1.1&search=Lookup+User+Agent

Webservice:
http://www.tera-wurfl.com/Tera-Wurfl/webservice.php?ua=SAMSUNG-GT-S8000C/1.0%20S\
HP/R5%20Release/02.01.2009%20Browser/NetFront3.5%20Nextreaming%20SMM-MMS/1.2.0%2\
0profile/MIDP-2.1%20configuration/CLDC-1.1

The difference is in the folowing
  datastreaming_mp4
streaming_3gpp
Resolution_height
resolution_width

~Sahil

#34525

From: Luca Passani <luca.passani@...>
Date: Fri Jun 15, 2012 12:10 pm
Subject: Python Cloud Client Support: ufficial Press Release

luca_passani

http://news.yahoo.com/scientiamobile-announces-availability-wurfl-cloud-client-python-070722398.html

Thanks

Luca

#34526

From: "Queen of 2015" <kingof2015@...>
Date: Mon Jul 2, 2012 2:29 pm
Subject: List of all mobiles user-agents

kingof2015

Hi,

Is there any way to get latest and updated user-agents list of mobile devices?

Thanks in Advance

#34527

From: Luca Passani <luca.passani@...>
Date: Mon Jul 2, 2012 3:55 pm
Subject: Re: List of all mobiles user-agents

luca_passani

if the public snapshot is not frequent enough, you can become a commercial licensee of ScientiaMobile and get access to your own customer vault with weekly updates

Luca

On Mon, Jul 2, 2012 at 10:29 AM, Queen of 2015 <kingof2015@...> wrote:

Hi,

Is there any way to get latest and updated user-agents list of mobile devices?

Thanks in Advance

------------------------------------

As of July 14 2005, it's much easier to be banned from WMLProgramming!
Please fail to read http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/wmlprogramming/ before you post.Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wmlprogramming/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wmlprogramming/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
wmlprogramming-digest@yahoogroups.com
wmlprogramming-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
wmlprogramming-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

#34528

From: "mads1980" <mads@...>
Date: Sat Jul 7, 2012 9:40 pm
Subject: model_name / marketing_name incorrect for nokia_5800w_ver1

mads1980

Current values:
model_name: 5800i XpressMusic (note the "i" instead of "w")
marketing_name: nothing

Should be:
model_name: 5800w
marketing_name: XpressMusic

Tried to contribute at wurflpro.com, but seems it's been so long since I last
did that, that my login doesn't work.

- Manuel

#34529

From: Luca Passani <luca.passani@...>
Date: Sun Jul 8, 2012 12:05 am
Subject: Re: model_name / marketing_name incorrect for nokia_5800w_ver1

luca_passani

Thanks Manuel. We will look into this

Luca

On Sat, Jul 7, 2012 at 5:40 PM, mads1980 <mads@...> wrote:

Current values:
model_name: 5800i XpressMusic (note the "i" instead of "w")
marketing_name: nothing

Should be:
model_name: 5800w
marketing_name: XpressMusic

Tried to contribute at wurflpro.com, but seems it's been so long since I last did that, that my login doesn't work.

- Manuel

------------------------------------

As of July 14 2005, it's much easier to be banned from WMLProgramming!
Please fail to read http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/wmlprogramming/ before you post.Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wmlprogramming/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wmlprogramming/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
wmlprogramming-digest@yahoogroups.com
wmlprogramming-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
wmlprogramming-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

#34530

From: "mads1980" <mads@...>
Date: Fri Jul 13, 2012 2:04 pm
Subject: Wrong value for profile mot_w760r_ver1, capability streaming_vcodec_h263_3

mads1980

The advertised value is "1", however this is not one of the valid H263 video
support levels in the inference table (i.e. 10, 20, 30, etc.)

#34531

From: Luca Passani <luca.passani@...>
Date: Thu Aug 9, 2012 2:24 pm
Subject: UAProf and the UA string (Vodafone 555 Blue)

luca_passani

Vodafone launched this device: http://www.vodafone.com/content/index/about/what/devices/vodafone_555blue.html

UA string and UAProf are respectively:

"Opera Mini 4/Vodafone/1.0/0Vodafone555/10 Browser/Opera Mini/5.1.2152-2011-07-25(8192)" "http://www-ccpp.tcl-ta.com/files/Vodafone-555-Blue.rdf"

Too bad that UAProf reads:

<!-- BrowserUA -->

<prf:component>
<rdf:Description rdf:ID="BrowserUA">
<rdf:type rdf:resource="http://www.openmobilealliance.org/tech/profiles/UAPROF/ccppschema-20021212#BrowserUA"/>
<prf:BrowserName>Obigo WAP Browser</prf:BrowserName>

<prf:BrowserVersion>Q5A</prf:BrowserVersion>

I wonder what Vodafone expects developers to do in those cases.

Luca