Here are my notes from a talk by Stacey Mulcahy at the FITC 2012 Vancouver Conference:
Stacey raises some valid points about the responsive design buzz word that has taken our industry by storm and raising the question: Are we dumbing down the web experience in order to achieve responsive needs and thus creating a “vanilla web”?
- we don’t have this (responsive design) figured out yet because it is so new, no one is an expert
- buzz words are synonymous with technology innovations (*cough* Web 2.0), but after the glitter they fall into this “trough of disillusionment”
- typical modern client says “I need a responsive site”. “Ya you and everyone else, get in line and would you like fries with that?”
- http://punchcut.com – screen resolution reference chart
- mobile is being defined by what it is not
- generational expectations vary (i.e. youth generation has different performance expectations in comparison to baby boomers)
- basic idea of responsive design is taking all the same content into different formats/layouts, this is are starting point
- embrace fluidity, don’t be a “pixel precision whore”! This is typically achieved with percentage based containers
- idea of the fold is changing, so different on multiple devices and resolutions, how can you define one fold, there is no fold
- media queries, browser resize as illustration (for illustrative prototyping purposes to show how the site responds), not as interaction
- flexible images, this is difficult when only using one source, this results in heavy downloads of large images, combo of server side with JavaScript seems to be the best solution so far, but it’s not ideal
- one content source, “it’s like polishing a turd”, “digital muffin top”, consider mobile first, if the desktop needs more then why?
- use verses context, “mobile context means that I’m a caffeinated squirrel?”, suggesting that we are moving quickly when on our mobile device, which is untrue…we are more like easily distracted zombies
- lessons learned, process requires change, so many touch points, so many browsers, clients are always hung up on what it will look like, style prototypes in the browser, but this doesn’t discredit graphic programs, design and development nee to work together throughout the process
- design in not layout, about the architecture, visual user experience, interaction layer, if it is touch should it be different?…probably
- blame the implementation not the technique
- making time, scope creep on responsive projects, clients want it to cost the same, ROI?
- time spent in browser is greater than time spent in photoshop? Probably a better starting point for prototyping responsive sites
- mo pixels mo problems, time needs to be devoted to QA and responsive sites will cost more and take more time
- shared content means shared expectations, appearance costs, to do it right the time and effort needs to be made
- Can thoughtful experiences also be innovative?
- Disney site has been redesigned to be responsive, take a look, are we returning to a template styled web where every site starts to look the same?
- are we dumbing down the experience to make it more consistent across the board, are we moving into a “vanilla web”?
- there is a fine line between pushing innovation and managing client expectations
- use the right tool for the right job
- http://kippt.com/bitchwhocodes/responsive-links, resource for responsive site examples