seutje/thoughts on responsive webdesign

## thoughts on responsive webdesign
I totally agree with you on the point that it's a way better idea to tailor for conditions rather than predefined devices/browsers/platforms, but the problem with "responsive webdesign" (hate that buzzword btw) is that there doesn't seem to be a way to set conditions for things like download speed.

for instance: every1 seems to assume that mobile devices have a crappy connection by definition, but I'd say there's a world of difference between say, a mobile device on EDGE or one on 3G, or even one on speedy wifies. Or the other side of it: a 17" laptop on a 3G stick (or tethering over a phone) vs one on a cable modem. Regardless of viewport size, you might want to present the user on 3G with a link to an image, allowing them to decide if they want to load it up, and present the user on a cable modem with the image straight up. This is just a quick example off the top of my head, but I'm sure others can think of more examples...

Also, I've noticed that most ppl struggle with doing "responsive webdesign" right, making everything relative and not imposing *any* limits isn't always a good idea, as Andy Clarke recently illustrated by accident (http://bit.ly/ejfJP6). Most "responsive" websites I've seen actually end up disabling the ability to zoom out on some devices, by accident, because when the content fits in the window, the client automagically disabled it. It sort of makes me sad to see you don't impose any minimum on your website, which might cause things like your logo to be cut off and only partially visible (http://bit.ly/gudlCZ granted, this might not seem like a realistic resolution to you today, but imagine web-enabled wrist-watches or something...). Others even go as far as to disable zooming entirely by using the (much dreaded) <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1, maximum-scale=1, minimum-scale=1, user-scalable=0" />. Why anyone in their right might would even consider doing that (and why you are able to do that) is entirely beyond me and I'm glad to see you're not doing this.

It seems that it's easy to do this "responsive webdesign" thing in a horrible way, making the experience for the user even worse than with a regular, fixed-width 960 site, and it's hard to do it right.
If I were to give any advice from a user-perspective, it would be to make as little assumptions as possible (e.g. don't assume that low resolution === low bandwidth or vice versa), but also don't make things too relative and please do impose minimums and maximums. Test like a crazy mofo, even for conditions that don't necessarily translate to a certain device/browser/platform *today* but also test for conditions that might one day exist. I can already hear you thinking "oh, but we'll just update it then", but seriously, we all know that's not going to happen. There's still sites lingering out there that pretty much only work properly on netscape 4 @ 640x480 or some shit...

Hope my writing style didn't make you throw up all over your <insert input device of choice>, I am not a native english speaker.
	I totally agree with you on the point that it's a way better idea to tailor for conditions rather than predefined devices/browsers/platforms, but the problem with "responsive webdesign" (hate that buzzword btw) is that there doesn't seem to be a way to set conditions for things like download speed.

	for instance: every1 seems to assume that mobile devices have a crappy connection by definition, but I'd say there's a world of difference between say, a mobile device on EDGE or one on 3G, or even one on speedy wifies. Or the other side of it: a 17" laptop on a 3G stick (or tethering over a phone) vs one on a cable modem. Regardless of viewport size, you might want to present the user on 3G with a link to an image, allowing them to decide if they want to load it up, and present the user on a cable modem with the image straight up. This is just a quick example off the top of my head, but I'm sure others can think of more examples...

	Also, I've noticed that most ppl struggle with doing "responsive webdesign" right, making everything relative and not imposing any limits isn't always a good idea, as Andy Clarke recently illustrated by accident (http://bit.ly/ejfJP6). Most "responsive" websites I've seen actually end up disabling the ability to zoom out on some devices, by accident, because when the content fits in the window, the client automagically disabled it. It sort of makes me sad to see you don't impose any minimum on your website, which might cause things like your logo to be cut off and only partially visible (http://bit.ly/gudlCZ granted, this might not seem like a realistic resolution to you today, but imagine web-enabled wrist-watches or something...). Others even go as far as to disable zooming entirely by using the (much dreaded) <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1, maximum-scale=1, minimum-scale=1, user-scalable=0" />. Why anyone in their right might would even consider doing that (and why you are able to do that) is entirely beyond me and I'm glad to see you're not doing this.

	It seems that it's easy to do this "responsive webdesign" thing in a horrible way, making the experience for the user even worse than with a regular, fixed-width 960 site, and it's hard to do it right.
	If I were to give any advice from a user-perspective, it would be to make as little assumptions as possible (e.g. don't assume that low resolution === low bandwidth or vice versa), but also don't make things too relative and please do impose minimums and maximums. Test like a crazy mofo, even for conditions that don't necessarily translate to a certain device/browser/platform today but also test for conditions that might one day exist. I can already hear you thinking "oh, but we'll just update it then", but seriously, we all know that's not going to happen. There's still sites lingering out there that pretty much only work properly on netscape 4 @ 640x480 or some shit...

	Hope my writing style didn't make you throw up all over your <insert input device of choice>, I am not a native english speaker.