4 ms·
Would have expected it to be responsive?
by jasoncartwright 14y ago
Would have expected it to be responsive?
- daigoba66 14y agoThe site renders perfectly fine and looks quite nice on my phone. I don't know that a site needs to be "responsive" if you first design it to look good on mobile.
- cseelus 14y agoFonts in general and especially in the sidebar are to tiny for me to comfortably read it on my phone.
- neeee 14y agozoom in
- TylerE 14y agoIf you have to zoom, your mobile site is broken.
- chris_wot 14y agoNot necessarily. But it's funny, Nielsen believes in different pages for different devices. Guess he doesn't want to follow his own advise, as per normal it seems!
- benologist 14y agoIf you have a "mobile site" you're doing it wrong.
- jarek-foksa 14y agoAlso, the links are clearly breaking WCAG AA: http://webaim.org/blog/wcag-2-0-and-link-colors/ http://webaim.org/blog/wcag-2-0-and-link-colors/
- pwenzel 14y agoI wonder why the site was built with Zurb Foundation, but stripped of its ever-useful responsive grid?
- jcomis 14y agoWhy? He's taken almost every chance he's had to either bash responsive as bad for UX or completely misrepresent what responsive actually is (see here: http://www.netmagazine.com/interviews/nielsen-responds-mobile-criticism http://www.netmagazine.com/interviews/nielsen-responds-mobil...)