my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » Film-Yak   » Mobile Friendly Version of Film-Tech (Page 2)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Author Topic: Mobile Friendly Version of Film-Tech Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 09-21-2016 01:19 AM                        I can't stand browsing the web on my phone. Mainly because it is so slow. Even the most modern phones have cripplingly-slow CPUs and GPUs. And most websites are overdesigned because that makes web sites better. Through my studies I have found that combining these two features does not work well. I long for the old simple Geocities sites... well those loaded slow because the server was probably running off of someone's dial-up modem. But the sites were simple. Every graphic icon was an animated GIF. Even the page backgrounds were animated GIFs. It was wonderful. And frames all over the place. Anyone miss frames? How could one not??? Also I have T-Mobile who only has a single cell tower in the entire country so that may have something to do with it.  |  IP: Logged Marcel Birgelen Film God Posts: 3357 From: Maastricht, Limburg, Netherlands Registered: Feb 2012 posted 09-21-2016 07:56 AM                     I'm actually amazed at the amount of punch they pack into a Galaxy S7 or recent iPhone... Look at what kind of mobile games are being produced. My phone display probably has as many pixels as the PC I'm typing on right now, but this one has serious issues to play a full HD video, my phone doesn't... So, processing power isn't really the problem here. Actually, I'd even say that bandwidth isn't a real killer anymore, at least if you're living in a spot that's halfway decently covered by 4G or at least 3G. What is a problem though, is design. A website that requires you to constantly pinch around to zoom in/zoom out and pan across the site isn't really mobile friendly. Fixed with layouts rarely work well on mobile devices and I particularly hate it when somebody creates a distinctive mobile site that strips out all the functionality. Just like the IMDB site for example. Ah, you want to know the stuff you didn't know already? Hah, got 'ya... And the "desktop site" works awful on a mobile device. So, a well thought-out responsive design is the best solution for a mobile-compatible website in my opinion. The problem is though, it's particularly hard to build one that works great for all scenarios. You might end up with tons of possible break-points in your design, components that need to scale, etc. And then there is cross-browser-compatibility. Considering it all, you can ask yourself if it's worth it.  |  IP: Logged Bobby Henderson "Ask me about Trajan." Posts: 10973 From: Lawton, OK, USA Registered: Apr 2001 posted 09-21-2016 09:19 AM                     IMHO, the disorganized mess of web development tools and standards combined with all the different screen sizes and screen orientations is a big reason why so many web users have retreated to the "walled gardens" of social media apps. It's a hell of a lot easier to set up and maintain pages in several social media apps/sites than it is to set up a modern web site of your own. And if you're going to be stuck loading text and images into someone else's canned "theme" template then what's wrong with using the page template in a social media app? The WordPress theme and social media page both effectively work as a walled garden. The cycle feeds on itself enough that I wonder just how often the average person uses a web browser anymore. On mobile phones most people are using apps to check email, social media sites, etc. Web browsers are more vital on a traditional desktop or notebook computer, but the average person's browser history will be heavy with social media use. I don't think this is what the guys behind the movement to kill Flash and push "HTML5" intended. They wanted to try to make the web more "free" but forgot to include "user friendly" in the equation. So now we have a lot of walled garden prisons. This situation isn't great for traditional web site forums like Film-Tech. It's not inside some walled garden like Facebook. It's on the broader part of the web fewer people seem to be using. Forums like this aren't really "mobile friendly." The viewer needs a bigger traditional computer screen to read all the text without pinch zooming like crazy. And the forum participant will need a real keyboard to type out new posts, responses, etc. since it will probably involve writing whole paragraphs rather than something that can fit in a tweet.  |  IP: Logged Randy Stankey Film God Posts: 6539 From: Erie, Pennsylvania Registered: Jun 99 posted 09-21-2016 12:31 PM                     quote: quote: Randy Stankey Somebody who knows his shit should be able to design a website that functions well on both desktop and mobile devices but doesn't look or operate any differently on either platform. I disagree with this point. When I'm looking at a "mobile friendly" page, I expect to see a more minimal design. For example, a movie's showtimes listings shouldn't have every bit of detail about the movie you might see on a desktop site. Otherwise the page becomes too long and results in lots of scrolling, or constantly jumping to the next page. I agree with that, in principle, but I would also say that it doesn't matter whether it's a page for mobile or for desktop. Web pages should be well designed in the first place. You shouldn't have to see dozens of lines of text unless you choose to see it. You shouldn't have to see huge pictures covering the screen area or you shouldn't have to see teeny-tiny icons that you have to squint in order to see. It shouldn't matter whether you are looking at a website via a mobile device or a stationary device. Websites should just work.  |  IP: Logged Scott Jentsch Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1061 From: New Berlin, WI, USA Registered: Apr 2003 posted 09-21-2016 04:56 PM                        Lots of good points here. The issues surrounding how to handle multiple devices, portrait vs. landscape, and depth of information depending on whether a device is considered to be "mobile" or "desktop" are the kinds of things professional web designers deal with all the time. All the things that have been brought up here can be addressed from a technical standpoint, but at what cost of time and money? Today's reality does not reward those who take the time to do things right, but rather those who do things fast and right enough to be tolerable. When I created the "mobile-friendly" version of The BigScreen Cinema Guide, I did not just reformat all the content for a smaller screen. I thought about how someone on a phone might want to use the site, and what information they would be looking for. As a result, much of the information is pared down to streamline the process, as you can't possibly fit all the relevant detail about a movie or a theater onto a screen that fits in your hand. For those that want the full experience, every page on our site has a "Switch to Desktop Site" in the main options menu. Some businesses that I work with have no desire to spend an extra penny, so they don't have mobile-friendly versions of their web site. That's their choice. In a future redesign, I'll push adding a mobile-friendly layout as part of the package, but they may still not want to pay a single penny more for it. It's all a tradeoff, so every business, publisher, blogger, etc. needs to decide how much money/effort they're going to expend to what benefit. Kind of like everything else in life...  |  IP: Logged Scott Jentsch Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1061 From: New Berlin, WI, USA Registered: Apr 2003 posted 09-22-2016 09:16 AM                        After reading this post that I left yesterday, I realized that it may have come off as sounding like an excuse for poor quality work or laziness. I have typically fallen on the "wrong" side of popular demands for speed over quality, as my natural tendency is to make things as good as possible before releasing it. One can spend months working on every detail to make it as good as possible, and hopefully it hits the right mark. Today's market has no patience for such things. The contrasting approach is to release something that's good, but not perfect, and then continue to fine-tune it based on feedback from real-world use. A good web site is a continual work in progress. Unfortunately, when it's a client paying the bill, they're not always willing to invest in fine-tuning on an ongoing basis.  |  IP: Logged Justin Hamaker Film God Posts: 2253 From: Lakeport, CA USA Registered: Jan 2004 posted 09-22-2016 04:49 PM                        quote: Scott Jentsch I thought about how someone on a phone might want to use the site, and what information they would be looking for. This has always been my approach when it comes to our theatre's mobile pages. When I have a chance, I actually talk to our customers to see if the site is meeting their needs. When I encounter a customer who uses Fandango or Flixster instead of our site, I try to find out what makes those sites more appealing than ours. In some cases it's access to multiple locations, in some cases it's information about movies we aren't playing. At least I know it's factors I can't control.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.