This is my experience as well. One other thing though is bandwidth constraints. Feeding marginally useful images to a bandwidth constrained device makes the application less responsive. So, some javascript "sniffing" is useful when this is the case and building the page with some <#if> ftl is helpful in solving this problem.
Skip -----Original Message----- From: Jacques Le Roux [mailto:jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2013 7:51 AM To: user@ofbiz.apache.org Subject: Re: Formal Discussion I think Paul as a point here, but I was reading Paul's comment in this 6 months old thread http://markmail.org/message/3a5cdvxucijkf4mw and wondered about it. Because it sounded like opening a can of worms to me. So I asked advice to someone who knows far better current UI tricks and trends than me. Here is what she said: <<Javascript has its uses (e.g. exchanging images for high rez screens for higher resolution images) but in most cases Responsive Solutions will be CSS based with maybe some javascript to do some stuff in smaller screens for opening and closing things. As for max-width: the trend with responsive design has been to make it look good on all sizes of screens, meaning you either work from your smallest version (mobile first) or the largest (desktop first) and then put breakpoints as your design needs them. Not as devices change because device pixel sizes change at a rate that is not sustainable to maintain. That is also why user agent sniffing and device sniffing is not a good idea. Samsung alone has a range of a 100 or so smartphones. Chances that you are sniffing all correctly is almost 0. Just for a short look at what a range of pixels we are talking: http://screensiz.es/phone. And that is leaving "strange" devices, like a car monitor, a PS Vita, a Nintendo wii, your refrigerator, etc., out of the equation... We are moving towards a world where you have to design apart devices, purely based on pixel widths and showing everything in a visually pleasing way. That is why, imo, only a truly fluid layout can survive that will adapt to any screen width>> I believe she is quite right, things are evolving far to fast (er, screen resolutions ;o) to try to follow them... Jacques ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Piper" <p...@ilscipio.com> To: <user@ofbiz.apache.org> Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2013 3:48 PM Subject: Re: Formal Discussion > Hi Ted, > > the difference between adaptive and responsive is as follows: > > Adaptive is modified with specific screens in mind - in the case of the link > shared 450px. Anything in between is not covered, as I pointed out in > another thread a while ago. Hence it doesn't work for any device not fitting > the target spec - tablets, android phones, phones held sideways etc. > > Responsive on the other hand adapts itself to the different screen sizes, > stretches and modifies the look and feel entirely for a broader range of > devices. > > As a quick reference, have a look at: > http://stackoverflow.com/questions/14831530/responsive-design-vs-adaptive-de sign > http://www.symphonyonline.co.uk/design/item/responsive-layout-vs-adaptive-la yout-whats-the-difference > > You can achieve an optimal UX with both implementations, but they certainly > aren't the same. The former also requires alot of work and constant > modification. > > As far as the bigfish promotion is concerned, I am fine with people showing > their products, but blatantly promoting it on every post is just not my cup > of tea. Nuff said... > > Cheers > > > > -- > View this message in context: http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/Formal-Discussion-tp4643139p4643149.html > Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
