One conference I’ve been looking forward to all year is the Design4Mobile conference coming up September 20-24th in Chicago. I was excited before I saw the speaker list. Now, the conference can’t come soon enough!
(This was supposed to be a short post, but I got excited about all the cool speakers and wrote too much. So skip to the bottom to find out how to get a limited number of 15% discount codes for registration.)
I’ve attended a lot of conferences over the last few years. The conferences I’ve attended either have a broader focus and if I’m lucky, they have a mobile track. Some simply have have a session or two on mobile.
Other conferences that are focused on mobile tend to be of two different types. They are either focused on one platform exclusively (e.g., Apple’s WWDC) or are older conferences focused on telecoms (e.g., CTIA).
I’ve enjoyed the majority of the conferences I’ve attended so I can’t complain much about the format. But what has me excited about Design4Mobile is that it is the only conference I know of that is focus on mobile design and user experience. Four days of in depth conversations on these topics.
The conference is organized by Barbara Ballard and Little Springs Design who have been working on mobile design long before the iPhone. They are experts who I follow closely.
That alone would be enough, but come on, the speaker list is just insane. Here are just a few highlights:
- Josh Clark, Global Moxie and author of Tapworthy: Designing Great iPhone Apps — I saw Josh speak at SXSW long before I met him on Twitter or knew of his book. His session was the best one I saw. Phenomenal.
- Suzanne Ginsburg, Ginsburg Design and author of Designing the iPhone User Experience: A User-Centered Approach to Sketching and Prototyping iPhone Apps — I saw Suzanne speak earlier this year in Seattle before her book was published. She interviewed a lot of designers and developers in the process of developing her book so it’s great to hear the stories of how different people tackle problems.
- Scott Jenson, Mobile UX Designer at Google — Scott was on a panel with Barbara Ballard at SXSW. He has a practical approach to mobile, has a quick wit, and was talking about how phone can be used without taking them out of your pocket which I found fascinating.
- Corey Pressman, Exprima Media — It’s strange to look forward to seeing someone speak who works down the hall from you, but Corey spoke last week at Mobile Portland and I learned two things. 1. I learned just enough about his thoughts on mobile in education and the future of textbook publishing to want to know more. 2. That he is an excellent presenter and very funny.
- Katrin Verclas, MobileActive — I admire Katrin and her work at MobileActive so much. It is this sort of work that inspires me for what mobile technology can mean for society.
- Luke Wroblewski, Entrepreneur in Residence at Benchmark Capital — I saw Luke speak at Web Visions a few years ago before he got bitten by the mobile bug. His talk was full of both data and insights. Can’t wait to hear more of his thoughts on mobile and try to figure out what his is up to next (ssshhh… It’s a secret!)
And there are many more people I can’t wait to see. I’ve meant to write this for quite some time to say simply, if you are interested in mobile—particularly mobile design—this is the conference you should attend.
I have a limited number of 15% off registration codes for the conference. If you are interested in a code, please leave a comment or fill out the contact form and I’ll send it to you.
I hope to see you in Chicago!
In the midst of the conversation last week about CSS media query for mobile, Brian Fling said, “this is very similar to the ‘one web’ debate which has been raging in mobile for over five years.”
Exactly. In fact, it’s the same debate with new participants.
Blast from the Past: One Web Debate in 2006
Four years ago, Barbara Ballard described the debate like this:
“There are two main camps in the mobile web:
- One Web. The Internet is the Internet, and sites should run well on all devices. Optimization should be based on CSS and device detection, but should not change site function or content beyond the necessary.
- Mobile Web. The mobile is a different platform with different capabilities and different user needs. Sites should be optimized for mobile in many (but not all) cases.”
One of the things that struck me about last week’s discussion of CSS media queries was that there was an assumption on the part of many that delivering a single html document no matter the device was a desirable goal.
Whether people realize it or not, they’ve subscribed to the One Web viewpoint.
By contrast, many of the people who I consider leaders in mobile thought—Brian Fling, Jeff Croft, Barbara Ballard, Cameron Moll, etc.—were quick to point out that delivering different HTML makes sense most of the time for a variety of reasons ranging from performance to user context.
A Contrasting Viewpoint from Opera
In a bit of fortunate timing, between last night when I finished the draft of this post and this morning, Daniel Davis from Opera wrote about his perspective on CSS media query and One Web.
Daniel points out that Opera has “championed media queries for several years now” and points to a dedicated page detailing Opera’s full support of One Web.
Daniel outlines several positives of the One Web approach including “the obvious benefit of having only one codebase, albeit possibly more complex, to update and maintain,” and points out some potential pitfalls of content adaptation including the “there’s always likely to be an off–the–wall or cutting–edge device that falls between the cracks” of device detection databases like WURFL.
Daniel’s article is well-articulated and worth a read.
I don’t disagree with the points he makes about appeal of delivering a single HTML document, but I have yet to see anyone do it on anything other than small sites and personal blogs. And even then, the ones I’ve seen suffer from the performance items I mentioned last week.
Opera has been promoting CSS media query for mobile for several years and has a stated position on One Web, yet it doesn’t use these techniques for it’s own site.
Daniel writes that if his team “had more control over the company-wide CMS.” I wish that they did as well so we could see how they would build it.
So here we are several years after the One Web debate started and it’s easy to find sites that are based on the content adaptation and provide different html and assets based on the device class.
Translation: We Don’t Deliver Single HTML Documents Now
Anyone who has worked on a site that supports multiple languages knows that we don’t have One Web on the desktop web. We don’t have any problem delivering different html documents and assets to someone who speaks a different language.
Why is it ok for us to deliver different HTML documents because the user uses a different language, but it isn’t ok for us to deliver different HTML documents because the user is using a different device?
W3C’s Definition of the One Web Does Not Mean One HTML Document
The W3C’s Mobile Best Practices Working Group tackled the issue of One Web long ago. They came to a conclusion that matches up well to my view of the mobile web.
The W3C’s Mobile Best Practices Working Group defines the One Web Principle as:
One Web means making, as far as is reasonable, the same information and services available to users irrespective of the device they are using. However, it does not mean that exactly the same information is available in exactly the same representation across all devices. The context of mobile use, device capability variations, bandwidth issues and mobile network capabilities all affect the representation.
They go on further to define “Thematic Consistency of Resource Identified by a URI“:
Content should be accessible on a range of devices irrespective of differences in presentation capabilities and access mechanism…
A bookmark captured on one device should be usable on another, different type of device even if it does not yield exactly the same experience. If the page that was bookmarked is not appropriate for the device that is now using it, an alternative that is suitable should be provided.
- Mobile devices should receive content that is thematically consistent with the content that someone would see at a given URI in a desktop browser.
- The content, functionality, and appearance of the information delivered to mobile devices may vary significantly from that which is delivered to the desktop web.
This is a definition of One Web that I can get behind.
One Web Means Access to Optimized Content
As more web developers start thinking about and developing for mobile, we can expect to see this debate about the One Web reemerge again and again.
You may not agree with the conclusions I’ve come to about the One Web. That’s fine.
But at minimum, make sure that you’re not simply adopting the idea of a single HTML document as being inherently better without questioning where that assumption comes from.
Is a single HTML document the best solution for your users? Or is it simply the best solution for you?
To me, One Web is about universal access to information, not delivering the exact same code, assets or even content.
In my vision, I can send a url to someone and know that no matter where they are in the world, no matter what device they are using, that they will be able see that information in a way that is optimized for them.
My previous post on CSS Media Queries kicked off quite a bit of conversation. I wanted to follow up on a few points that have been made and a couple of things I failed to communicate well in the original post.
CSS Media Queries are a Useful Tool for Mobile
One of the unfortunate side effects of the strident title I chose was that it gave many people the impression that I didn’t think CSS Media Queries were useful at all for mobile.
That’s not the case. We’re using them in two mobile projects right now and contemplating using them for a third.
I wrote in the post that “CSS media queries are a tool, but they are not a silver bullet.” But that point was overshadowed by the post title and the rest of the article talking about the problems that you need to be aware of when using them.
I got a chance to chat with Ethan Marcotte via Twitter. He wrote:
I think we agree on the fundamental points, honestly—the implementation should always be tailored to the site/audience.
I wholeheartedly agree. In fact, Ethan wrote in his article about Responsive Web Design:
That’s not to say there isn’t a business case for separate sites geared toward specific devices; for example, if the user goals for your mobile site are more limited in scope than its desktop equivalent, then serving different content to each might be the best approach.
In the same way in which my more nuanced opinion about media queries was skewed by my poor choice of title, I think Ethan’s nuanced opinion about when and how media queries can be used for mobile has been skewed by the enthusiasm that people had in response to his A List Apart article and how they might use the technique for mobile.
As I said in my post and reaffirmed to Ethan over Twitter, I’m actually quite excited about Responsive Web Design. I’m going to write more about that separately.
What I really meant to say was…
Even though Ethan never intended media queries to be seen as a total solution for mobile, that view has been enthusiastically adopted by others. I’ve read many blog posts and tweets on the topic. There was a session at Web Visions called Mobile Web Dev without Developing a Mobile Site based on building sites using media queries.
PPK got is right when he said that I “challenged the conventional view that media queries are all we need to make a website mobile-friendly.” There was a growing consensus that media queries were all that was needed and that consensus needed to be challenged.
In rereading my post, there is one sentence that I think best summarizes my view:
The way in which CSS media query has been promoted for mobile hides tough problems and gives developers a false promise of a simple solution for designing for multiple screens.
I’ve modified the sentence slightly to make it clearer that it was the way media queries were being promoted as a solution for mobile that was the real problem.
It is also clear that fool’s gold is not the right phrase. Fool’s gold is something that looks like something of worth, but in reality has no intrinsic value. Media queries do have value and are useful tools.
I’m sorry for poor title choice.
Great Ways to Use CSS Media Queries
There are a few great use cases for media queries for mobile. I highlighted selected web apps and html emails in my previous email. A few others are:
- As Pim Derks commented on my post, in situations where “a client has a limited budget, but wants his site to look good on iPhone.” Given the alternative of no mobile web site, it makes sense. I’d suggest looking to see what you can do to stop unnecessary downloads where possible.
- And the most likely use of media queries, as a small part of a larger mobile optimization effort or a discrete tool being used in one off situations like web apps or html emails.
You’ll notice that the solution that PPK suggests is quite a bit different than starting from the desktop web and simply adding media queries.
What are the Tough Problems that Discussion of Media Queries Obscures?
I’ve enumerated many of the technical challenges with media queries, but when I talk about media queries hiding tough problems, I’m not talking about any of the issues I raised in my previous post.
What I was referring to was the idea that there was a simple solution to creating a mobile web site obscures a series of infrastructure issues that I believe web developers are going to be confronting over the next few years.
Let’s assume for a moment that there are situations in which you need to deliver different html and associated assets to different mobile devices. To do so requires that your content management or ecommerce system is equipped to do the following:
- Detect different devices and the capabilities of those devices.
- Select the correct template based on the device. This implies that your system gracefully handles multiple templates.
- Separate assets added by authors from the words that they write so that those photos, video, etc. can be resized and reformatted appropriately for the device.
- Provide tools or establish processes for resizing images and videos. Either manually, or better yet automatically, encode video in multiple formats based on the device.
- Support non-web consumption of content (e.g., native applications). This will likely require further consideration of how to remove markup and presentation from content.
And many more obstacles created by legacy web publishing tools designed long before we started thinking seriously about mobile.
The big challenges our clients face are rethinking and retooling their infrastructure for mobile. It’s going to be a massive undertaking for a lot of businesses.
The sooner we realize this fact, the sooner we can get to work figuring out the best ways to build that infrastructure.
Read the follow up article written August 21, 2013
Ethan Marcotte’s article Responsive Web Design has caught the imagination of web developers. Several subsequent articles have touted the CSS media query feature as a way to build mobile-optimized web sites.
Even I’m guilty of contributing to this meme with my article on CSS orientation.
Unfortunately, CSS media query is fool’s gold for mobile devices. It hides tough problems and gives developers a false promise of a simple solution for designing to multiple screens.
The Short Version
Ferreting out the problems with CSS media queries for mobile devices is easy if you look at what media queries purportedly promise:
All you need to do to transform your desktop web design into something optimized for devices with smaller screens, less powerful CPUs, and slower network connections is to add more code.
The idea of adding more code—adding more to download—in order to optimize for mobile should be the first clue that this isn’t a good solution.
Core Assumption: Speed Matters More on Mobile
I’m going to point out several technical flaws with media queries. Nearly all of them rely on my belief that speed matters more on mobile devices.
That isn’t to say that we’re more tolerant of slow desktop web pages. Instead, that mobile is more likely to be used in situations were the speed of access matters more (urgently looking for a business) and under conditions (network speed, device processing power) that are less optimal for speed.
When designing for mobile, performance is a key consideration.
Letting the Browser Scale Images is a Bad Idea
Ethan’s article on Responsive Web Design relies on a technique he calls Fluid Images.
The idea behind fluid images is that you deliver images at the maximum size they will be used at. You don’t declare the height and width in your html, but instead let the browser resize the images as needed while using CSS to guide their relative size.
This technique is a bad idea for mobile for a couple reasons.
Full Images = Unnecessarily Large Files to Download
The full image is downloaded despite the fact that it will only be seen at a fraction of the size on a mobile device. In the Responsive Web Design example page, the images are 330 x 345 pixels in true size, but when viewed on an iPhone, they are only ever seen at approximately 150 x 157 pixels.
The six images of characters from Sherlock Holmes that are included in the example page total 208K. Resizing those images and optimizing them reduces the total file size for all six images to 45K. That’s an 78% reduction in file size and download time.
Downloading 162K unnecessarily on a mobile device is nothing to sneeze at no matter how good the mobile phone is.
Browser Resizing Can Be CPU and Memory Intensive
Yes, desktop browsers and iPhones have no trouble resizing images, but what about older or cheaper phones with less formidable CPUs? With this technique, we’re asking them to download larger images, uncompress them to their full size in memory, and then resize them to fit the screen.
Even Apple’s Mobile Safari documentation says “You need to size images appropriately. Don’t rely on browser scaling.”
Using Media Queries to Deliver Different Images Doesn’t Work
I know what many of you are probably thinking. So the fluid images technique doesn’t work. Let’s just use media queries to deliver different images depending on screen size.
There are two ways this can be accomplished. The first is to have image tags that are hidden by CSS. The second is to use CSS background images and switch the background image. Let’s look at both techniques.
Hiding Image Tags Using CSS Media Queries
Rachel Andrew‘s article about CSS media queries showcased dConstruct’s web site as an example.
The dConstruct site is beautiful. The site grows bigger as your browser gets bigger. The photographs come to life when you hover over them. It’s truly worth a look.
The large photographs of the speakers are placed on the page using image tags. The black and white images are a single sprite that is layered over the color photographs using CSS.
And if you view the site on a mobile device, the large photographs of the speakers are hidden from view. You get a simple list that fits well on the screen.
A CSS media query instruction is used to set display:none on the div containing the speaker images.
However, the iPhone still downloads the images even though they are not displayed.
There was a some speculation during the Big Web Show interview with Ethan Marcotte that perhaps the tools that were reporting what the browser was downloading were erroneously inflating the number of files that were truly download.
To verify that images are downloaded despite CSS media queries, I tested two different ways. First, I made a copy of a page using the responsive design onto a local server, loaded it on an iPhone, and then watched the web server logs to observe what was downloaded. Second, I set my iPhone to use my Mac as a proxy server so every request to dConstruct’s site was logged.
In both cases, it showed the image files are downloaded despite the fact that the media query has set them to display:none. This means that the iPhone downloads an extra 172K for photos that the user will never see.
Hiding CSS Background Images
Surely CSS background images will work better than image tags, right? Wrong.
I tested a few different combinations of CSS background images and media queries. What I found was:
- Using CSS media query to set display:none on an element containing a background image does not prevent Mobile Safari from downloading it.2
- Using CSS media query to override a background image with one created specifically for mobile results in both the desktop and the mobile image getting downloaded.4
Two methods that appear to work are:
- Setting the parent of an element with a background image to display:none.3
- Using media query min-width declaration to only specify a minimum browser width for the desktop image and a max-width for the mobile image does result in only the mobile image being downloaded in Mobile Safari.5
These two options mean that using CSS media queries isn’t completely impossible, but using the parent element to hide images and changing existing desktop CSS to add min-width declarations are significant changes to existing CSS. It isn’t going to be as simple as adding a CSS media query for mobile and calling your job done.
FWIW, it is this behavior of downloading images even if they are currently not displayed that allows us to have images show up in pull down menus and on other hover events without a delay while the image is downloaded. This is generally a good thing.
My first introduction to media queries was when we were asked to assist another web developer who had built a page that contained a Google Map on the desktop version, but the div containing the map was hidden on the mobile web version using a media query.
CSS Media Queries aren’t Supported Well
If you can overcome all of the challenges I’ve outlined above, you’ll find that CSS media queries are not supported by many mobile browsers. PPK’s compatibility table shows that even amongst modern smartphones, the support is spotty and inconsistent.
The picture is much worse when you decide to support older browsers.
If you choose to use media queries to provide a mobile version of your web site, you’re not only picking a poor solution, but you’re excluding a large number of mobile users.
People with modern smartphones may be the demographic you care about, but you should be make a conscious decision about what device classes you support.
Ignoring the Mobile Context
The promise of CSS media queries is that you can take your existing desktop web site html and add this additional presentation layer for mobile. Doing so ignores the fact that a mobile user may have very different needs than a desktop user.
There is a great quote from Brian Fling in his book on mobile design:
Create a product, don’t re-imagine one for small screens. Great mobile products are created, never ported.
Does your desktop web home page use geolocation lookups? Probably not. Should your mobile site home page? Quite possibly.
Separate Mobile Web Sites are a Good Thing
I know separate mobile web sites are a pain to develop. We have a lot of infrastructure to build to make the mobile web go, and I’m going to be writing more about that soon. But there are good reasons why we need separate mobile web sites.
During Ethan’s interview on the Big Web Show, some time was spent discussing how sharing links from the New York Times doesn’t work the way you would hope. If you send a link from the mobile site and someone opens it on their desktop browser, it is still formatted for mobile.
The conclusion drawn from this during the podcast is that CSS media queries might be a better solution because there would only be one URL, and it would work for both desktop and mobile.
Here’s some hard numbers to consider from a YSlow examination of the New York Times desktop and mobile home pages:
As you can see, the mobile web site has a fifth of the HTTP requests of the desktop version and is 583K smaller. That’s over 90% smaller and significantly faster on a mobile device.
(As an aside, HTTP requests are much more expensive on mobile devices than on desktop due to the latency of wireless network connections.)
I agree that the NY Times links should work, but the solution isn’t to take the bloated desktop home page and add more CSS code to make it mobile (un)friendly.
Some Good Uses of CSS Media Queries
There are some good uses of CSS media queries. If you’re building a discrete web application where you have more control and can make sure that the desktop web isn’t bloated, it can make sense.
Also, Ros Hodgekiss from Campaign Monitor wrote an exceptional article on how you can use media queries in html email to provide a mobile optimized layout. This is perhaps the ideal use case because when you send html email, you have no choice but to send a single html document regardless of what device the recipient will be using.
Responsive Web Design Still Rocks
Wait? Responsive web design still rocks? Hard to believe after everything I’ve written, eh?
I’m not talking about CSS media queries, but instead of the idea of building around a grid, planning your design for different screen sizes, and thinking about the modular building blocks and how they can be moved based on screen size.
That is the real gem in Ethan’s article. I hope we see two things come from his responsive web design piece:
- More desktop web sites that take advantage of fluid grids and CSS media queries to optimize for the multiple sizes of desktop screens. Media queries still make sense for desktop designs.
- More designers and developers thinking about design as modular even if it isn’t implemented with media queries.
I find his comparisons to responsive architecture to be fascinating and the designs we’ve seen using these techniques to be compelling. But the core mechanism used to accomplish them, CSS media queries, isn’t up to the task when it comes to mobile development.
No Silver Bullets
Developing for the mobile web is difficult. There are no simple solutions that make it easy to provide a great mobile-optimized experience. CSS media queries are a tool, but they are not a silver bullet.
This shouldn’t be a surprise to us. We now take our content management systems for granted, but it wasn’t always this easy for the desktop web. We forget how difficult it was to simply get Apache running properly.
During the last big wave of technology, we had a lot of infrastructure to build before we could reliably deliver quality experiences for desktop browsers. We’ve got a similar road ahead when it comes to mobile.
But no matter how difficult, mobile is worth it. The power of having information in people’s hands—no matter where they are in the world—makes mobile worth the extra time and effort.