IT dorks have to work, I suppose, I can see no other rationale for the change.
carrite wrote:
The rationale is given in my post, above:
1. Mobile devices (smartphones and tablets) are hugely popular and constitute a huge share of browsing.
2. The world's most popular search engine is heavily penalizing sites that have separate desktop and mobile versions.
3. That penalizing causes very large drops in sales and market share, so it must be avoided at all costs.
4. It's very EASY to adapt a simple, feature-light, small mobile device layout for a desktop monitor (you just stretch it and make it way too large)
5. It's very DIFFICULT to adapt a complex, feature-rich, large desktop layout to a tiny smartphone screen and have it be sufficiently readable and usable.
Thus, most companies are switching to a single "responsive" site that is designed for mobile devices, and they more or less just stretch that dumbed-down mobile layout to fit desktop monitors. Some sites make an effort to offer desktop-only enhancements that use the desktop's larger size for something useful, but usually it's pretty weak (nowhere close to the usefulness of a native desktop layout), and many don't even bother at all.
Result: desktop users get screwed with an oversimplified layout, fewer features, giant buttons and text, etc. Their giant monitors and ultra-precise mouse/pointer selection devices no longer get used to anything near their full potential, and they just get huge, stretched smartphone layouts that are lame and wasteful.
Because, we all have to worship at the altar of the holy 5-inch screens and big, fat, imprecise tapping fingers.
It really sucks, but that's why.
.
Edited by user
8 years ago |
Reason: Not specified