FrankandPat

August 31, 2007

forget .mobi

Filed under: mobile, web — danielharris @ 1:45 pm

Go for the m. approch – m.facebook.com, m.netvibes.com. Sweet, simple, and doesn’t break bad Orange browsers or Opera mini browsers – and you can look at them online properly.

Advertisements

2 Comments »

  1. The point of .mobi — unlike any “m.site.com,” “mobile.site.go.com,” “wap.site.com,” “site.com/m” or even “site.com/mobile” address formulation — is that a .mobi site is guaranteed to work on any mobile phone or with any carrier because of the enforceable, but open, standards of the .mobi domain. (The same ones as the W3C’s Mobile Web Initiative).

    This also means that end users are guaranteed a positive experience when using .mobi sites because they won’t have long, expensive downloads and will have content relevant to the mobile users.

    As for looking at their equivalents online, the article at http://pc.dev.mobi/?q=node/18 shows how to use PHP to differentiate between device types; in this case, a PC can be considered a different device.

    Comment by Vance Hedderel, Director, PR & Communications, dotMobi — August 31, 2007 @ 7:57 pm

  2. Thanks for the comment Vance. I’m curious to know how these standards are enforceable as you are suggesting – like W3C web standards, aren’t they are simply guidelines which can be used to increase the effectiveness of sites – which is why people voluteerally employ them? perhaps i’ve missed something! let me know.

    And can these standards not be used by m.site.com sites too? Like all good practices, wouldn’t they naturally (virally) permeate into general practice for anything digital experienced on a mobile device?

    Also it feels a little strange to introduce a mobile domain that de-localises sites, when the mobile experience is defined largely by geography. Where are .mobi sites located? are they non profit or commercial organisations? .co.uk and .org give the user a clue to a context at least.

    Do you know if any located domains are being discussed? m.site.lon sounds quite appealing

    Comment by danielharris — September 2, 2007 @ 8:51 pm


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: