Reply to: Website design catering for touchscreens

[PAH]

although it might make blocking said ads harder if they're innocuous bits of HTML.

Bingo! The real reason the industry is moving from Flash to HTML5.

They really want you to see those adverts.

[d000hg]

Apple have killed off Flash.

A minority platform can't kill off anything. And Flash does WAAAY more than HTML5 attempts to cover. HTML5 can kill off Flash video and banner ads, that would be fine... although it might make blocking said ads harder if they're innocuous bits of HTML.

[VectraMan]

Apple have killed off Flash.

Still works for me.

All very well killing off Flash, but SVG is essentially the same thing, just now under the HTML5 guise. You can say that it's better as an open standard, blah-blah blah, but end users won't care and those annoying ads will look exactly the same rendered by SVG as they did by Flash.

So flashy animated things in SVG for modern browsers, do a Flash version for old browsers, and basic as possible HTML everywhere else. That way you can support IE1.

[PAH]

Apple have killed off Flash.

HTML5 FTW!

[VectraMan]

For a startk, XP will never progress beyond IE8 and XP is still massive in the business world. So suggesting only those stuck in the past have not bothered to upgrade to IE9 isn't really useful - if your site targets businesses then IE8 has to be a prime consideration, not a fallback.

All of this is a good argument for Flash. It's the one solution that works the same for everybody. Well, nearly everybody.

Perhaps the better answer is an HTML5 version and a Flash version.

[d000hg]

Amazon are one example of a site which has replaced their Kindle App with an HTML5 web app on iOS - in so doing they avoid the restrictions of the iStore and the 30% cut Apple demand. I think we'll see that being the trend as mobile HTML5 continues to mature.

[PAH]

They all offer apps optimised for the touch screen experience, as do ebay & imdb and lots of others. I doubt many people visit the sites directly from their smartphone or ipad browser.

I hate the idea of having to redevelop a website as an app for it to be desirable on a particular device.

I'm hoping HTML5 will be successful enough that one site designed correctly will work on all but the tiniest mobile screen.

Unless the app needs to harness device specific tech, that is not available via a browser, there can't be many genuine reasons why an app is better than a website for a website fronted company.

Maybe my views are distorted by witnessing people spending ages working on WAP sites only for them to be obsolete by the time they went live.

[doodab]

Maybe the bigger sites (Amazon, YouTube, Google) will become more obviously touch control oriented if tablets continue to be desirable. Or maybe they already are but have done it subtly enough to not alienate the majority who still browse using mouse and keyboard.

They all offer apps optimised for the touch screen experience, as do ebay & imdb and lots of others. I doubt many people visit the sites directly from their smartphone or ipad browser.

[d000hg]

those stuck with ten-year-old garbage like IE6/7/8 (7 and 8 were just patch releases of IE6 if truth be told) whilst providing a first-class experience for the majority using other browsers (including IE9).

For someone so technically savvy you do sometimes spout idealistic rubbish Nick. For a startk, XP will never progress beyond IE8 and XP is still massive in the business world. So suggesting only those stuck in the past have not bothered to upgrade to IE9 isn't really useful - if your site targets businesses then IE8 has to be a prime consideration, not a fallback.

IE7 is going fast on the heels of IE6 but IE8 is here to stay, personally I think it's hugely better than IE6 but that's kind of besides the point. In the real world it doesn't matter if FF, Chrome and Safari support HTML5, IE8 can't be a 2nd thought for those who sell to businesses.

A more serious technical question - if your site targets XP/IE8 users, is it worth doing a fancy HTML5 page and all the work to make a GOOD fall-back, or better just to focus on a well-designed HTML4 site?

[NickFitz]

I remember reading a book on web UI some years ago and it basically took a few hundred pages to say "just copy Amazon", as they (and many other big successful sites) spend lots of money and effort getting their site design right.

These days, the advice tends to be more "Whatever you do, don't copy Amazon"

Amazon can get away with all kinds of crap, simply because they're Amazon and people are going to spend their money there anyway.

[PAH]

Thanks. Something to read up on, on a typical miserable bank holiday weekend.

I remember reading a book on web UI some years ago and it basically took a few hundred pages to say "just copy Amazon", as they (and many other big successful sites) spend lots of money and effort getting their site design right.

Maybe the bigger sites (Amazon, YouTube, Google) will become more obviously touch control oriented if tablets continue to be desirable. Or maybe they already are but have done it subtly enough to not alienate the majority who still browse using mouse and keyboard.

I've seen some interesting HTML5 designs but not sure if they are going the same way as Flash sites, more about presentation than content. It's easy to get carried away with all the pizazz when something as simple as Google shows it's not really necessary.

[NickFitz]

Google around for "responsive design".

As for HTML5 (and CSS3, which is often lumped under the same label) being "not widely supported" - it's supported on Firefox, Safari, Chrome, Opera and IE9. In fact, the IE Team have stated that "We built IE9 from the ground up for HTML5".

By judicious use of HTML, CSS and JS one can easily implement sites that provide reasonable fallback presentation for those stuck with ten-year-old garbage like IE6/7/8 (7 and 8 were just patch releases of IE6 if truth be told) whilst providing a first-class experience for the majority using other browsers (including IE9).

Mind you, if your target market is China and/or South Korea, all this goes out of the window: IE6 still rules there

[PAH]

HTML5 is leading us all to the promised land.

No more hacking stuff about trying to get it working consistently on a multitude of browsers and devices.

No more false dawn plug-ins that get sucked up by the desperate and spat out by the righteous.

One world. One god. One internet standard. Amen.

[d000hg]

I think making a website display AND accept input on a touch device is pretty essential - but that doesn't mean HTML5... that isn't widely enough supported yet. Although it is very weird how the tables have turned - mobile devices are pushing HTML5 whereas only recently they had totally horrific browsers which made IE6 look great.

[PAH]

Had a quick look around and there are a few blogs/sites offering design guidelines for building sites that offer a user experience suitable for touch screens.

Minimum sizes for buttons, white space around navigation options, not relying on mouse hover for functionality (menus etc) seem to be the starting point. Designing more for fat fingers than small mouses.

Then you've got to cater for people wanting to navigate between pages by brushing a finger across the screen and all the other Apple interface style navigation.

Not sure (yet) how much of that is available 'out of the box' using current HTML5/CSS3 standards without having to resort to jQuery type libraries.