4 ms·
The non-print, non-mobile version: http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/us-charges-snowden-with-espionage/2013/06/21/507497d8-dab1-11e2-a016-9
by redthrowaway 13y ago
The non-print, non-mobile version:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/us-charges-snowden-with-espionage/2013/06/21/507497d8-dab1-11e2-a016-92547bf094cc_story.html http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/us-cha...
This actually seems to be a pretty big problem with the web right now. We've been balkanized into mobile and desktop versions of sites, to the point where sharing one with the other inevitably pisses someone off. This article is all but unreadable on desktop, and I suspect the same would be true in reverse.
The point of the web is to have multiple clients getting the same info from a single source. This doesn't work if mobile and desktop clients are served different versions of the same site, and in effect are barred from sharing with eachother.
- georgemcbay 13y agoI sort of agree with you... but then OTOH when it comes to virtually any newspaper/media site I almost always prefer viewing the mobile version to the "full site" (even when browsing on a traditional computer), because the mobile versions tend to be less stuffed up with garbage ads, interstitials, social networking buttons and other such shit-fuckery.
- nbouscal 13y agoI found it to be perfectly readable on desktop, and was actually really happy to not have all of the clutter of the regular site.