DBADT2007

Not everyone agrees with the idea of using auto-detection as a solution for providing a mobilized version of their website. For example, I've often noticed that auto-detection code will check if the device accessing the website is an iphone, if so it serves the regular website. What if I don't want to access the full-blown site? What if I hate to scroll around and zoom? What if the site runs script processors that actually load slowly on my iPhone? What if my iPhone is not accessing through a WIFI connection, but instead using ATT EDGE network? What if I want information from the website that offers information that is directly mobile related? These issues will become more prevalent as the market matures and most phones become "smart phones". To the very least, I believe the auto-detection feature on sites should give mobile users the option to choose whether they want the full blown version or the mobilized version of it, with the mobilized version being the default, but that is just my 2cents.

There might be another issue with auto-detection that may be lurking around the corner, which nobody really talks about. Depending on how auto-detection is handled, your site may slow down, even crash. Anyone know what a DOS attack is? The idea of crippling a site with multiple requests on a website has caused sites to crash. So what happens now when you are serving pages for not only PCs but also mobile phones? It really doesn't matter that the website is serving a simple mobilized versions, when the site must detect whether its a PC or a mobile that is visiting the site and parsing the appropriate page for it.

As a final point, trends seem to suggest that people "On The Go" want to access a site that is specifically mobile centric, See IBM Slims The Web For Your Phone. To make a comparison between a striped-down site and a mobile optimized site; I'd like you to take a look at these two screen captures. A comparison between John Mccain's mobilized site vs Barack Obama's mobile site.


Anyone notice that the site is not mobile centric? It has a Home, About, Issues, News & Media, Events, Blog, Action, Store, and Contribute, as main categories. And within each category exist subcategories. How many people on their mobiles (3" screen) will actually feel compelled to explore deep within each category? Not many, that I will tell you.
????: NamePros.com http://www.namepros.com/the-break-room/498049-mccain-vs-obama-com-vs-mobi.html


Now does anyone see how this site is mobile centric? It has Meet Barack, Obama News, Download Videos, Download Ringtones, Download Wallpapers, Ask A Friend to Join Obama Mobile, Give Hope to Your Friends, Let Your Vote Be Heard, and at the bottom a Signup for Mobile Alerts. All of these are items you'd expect from a mobile site. Additionally, you don't have to be clicking in deeper to actually get content. In addition, the site fits reasonably well on a (3" screen).

I hope this clears up why stripped sites isn't truly the solution to offering mobile optimized sites, as some have envisioned.

Your comment above, IMHO shows a lack of understanding of what .mobi really is. You are correct, we could have .iphone, .blackberry, .instinct, .dare, .whatevernewphonebrand. This argument would be analogous to stating that we should have a .ford, .chrysler, .bmw, .ferrari, .chevy, .gmc, .volvo, .acura, etc just to provide an address to each make of car, when a more logical solution might be having a .car- which all of these brands can use. It just doesn't make sense to have a .iphone/.blackberry as you put it, when you can serve all of them with a .mobi site. That is why mTLD established the use of standard styles guidelines in the first place, a site that has a ready "5" rating should be close to being universally compatible on any mobile phone. In fact having a ready "2" rating, seems to still work on some mobile phones.

For example, obamamobile.mobi while a ready "2" rating loads well on an iphone and a samsung. My guess is, it will load on all smart phones without a hitch, its the other mobile phones that may pose a problem with loading the mobile site.

Now I do understand the points some raise about sites that aren't complying with ready, thus the low rating on these sites. However, some don't feel compelled to comply with the standard styles guidelines for various reasons: mobile phones are migrating to smart phones, not enough mobile phones accessing mobile sites, any errors will be corrected once found, issues will resolve once a standard mobile browser is being used, etc.
????: NamePros.com http://www.namepros.com/showthread.php?t=498049

I know you aren't bashing .mobi. You raised valid questions, as many have done so.

And thanks for adding your comments.

ApeXX

Finally there's some substance to this thread.

__________________
FREE Xbox Live Gold codes added daily!

nicedomains

Oh brother does a thread exist about a .mobi domain or website on NP that doesn't turn into a .mobi sucks/doesn't suck argument!? Geez how annoying.

If it means I have to support .mobi to also support Obama then so be it!

Pred

Jeff

Please do post that "End user sale" info/update/progress, friend!
????: NamePros.com http://www.namepros.com/showthread.php?t=498049

Really, this is again about mTLD's coding compliance (and failure to enforce these and the mandated development requirements!) rules ... and not so much perceived functionality and how it "looks" in the rosey eyes of the few remaining "dot Mobey" enthusiasts!

Does anyone disagree that scoring a lowly "2" is not compliant per the rules?

As importantly, exactly where is this site being promoted outside of mTLD's self-seving blog?
Thanks for any insight.
PS. I know of zero "reported sales" to End users ... that have resulted in actual developed, substantive, stand-alone, fully compliant (scoring at least "4" out of a possible "5" at Ready), and actively promoted "dot Mobey's", IMHO.

I agree that the future is leading toward smart phones and a full, unrestricted web experience while "on the go" ... and this evolving technology along with advances in browsers ensures that the "dot Mobey" is obsolete!
-Jeff

__________________

DBADT2007

Jeff,
Do you read any of the responses that get directed to you??? I don't think you do. Otherwise, you would know that I have responded to this question. I hate to sound like a bad rip of an mp3 file (aka a broken record), but apparently you seem to refuse to accept that these issues are between mTLD and the respective parties involved. As always, I am simply amazed at the fact that you consider yourself with the right to be included in the decision process of these companies? Are you code enforcement for the W3C? Do you work for mTLD as a code enforcer? If your answer is no; then what gives you the right or better yet the authority, to be entitled to be kept within the loop as to the inner workings of all the companies involved? I am sure that everyone is looking forward to this answer.

You are correct in that scoring a "2" in ready is not compliant per the rules. However, having said that, if it works, then it works. Do you get what I am saying? Its not about your idea of perceived functionality, or about being a mobi enthusiast as you put it, but its about the site being functional to the majority of mobile users (Please Note: Per the Ready score, it could be argued that the site will not function in most mobile phones, yet there hasn't been any conclusive evidence to support this statement). At present, the site has been tested on a Samsung (me), iPhone (Keithmt). I am almost positive the site will render on the following mobiles: Blackberry, Nokia Nseries, Motorola Razr, Samsung Instinct, and LG Dare (if anyone can confirm either way, by all means do). It seems to me that the site was targeted to mid to high-end phones or better stated; what currently is available on the market.Can you or anyone at that, provide any supporting evidence of specific phones that are not loading or are showing errors in processing this mobile site? Because if you can't, then your point becomes more of a philosophical argument. Maybe, the rules are at a point to be changed, have you given that some thought? But, I am willing to bet that its your own bias and lack of objectivity which compels you to disregard formal logic. TBH, if that is what you can expect on a ready score of "2", then there might not be any real motivation to make the changes to get a fully compliant site to score 5/5.

On another note, yet quite similar to this argument- How many websites out on the Internet are not compliant to standards, in order to display correctly, on all browser(s)? As anyone knows most webmasters will only comply with browsers that dominate the Internet (e.g. IE, FireFox, etc). Are there other browsers on the market? You bet. Do all sites comply with all of these browsers? NO. What about accessibility requirements? Equally, not many do. So, webmasters rarely do bother with full compliance, as per standards rules.

It may have started with an mTLD blog post, as you put it. However, if you run a Google Search for linking sites to obamamobile.mobi you will see that the news has already spread to multiple sites, and continues to spread as we speak.

Once again I feel compelled to state how important it is to be Objective and use Formal Logic when it comes to commenting, debating issues, or even replying to answers. Regardless if you are pro or nay on dotMobi, it shows a great level of understanding and professionalism when an individual can separate FACTS from OPINIONS and can reason it all with FORMAL LOGIC. Therefore, I feel the need to state that the above statement you have made shows your bias toward the dotMobi extension. Your comment, neither proves or disproves anything, yet you feel compelled to state it as if it means something. Now, you very well know there have been sales to end users, that there are stand-alone (fully compliant sites) that score at least a 4/5 at ready and finally you do know that there are dotMobis that are actively promoted. Just not all three requirements as you seem to require.
????: NamePros.com http://www.namepros.com/showthread.php?t=498049

Just for kicks... Any chance you can reference, at least one .com reported sale that was sold to an end-user, that has been sold for at least 8 figures completed all in cash, developed with no html errors and no browser incompatibilities, and fully mobile compatible with a ready score of 5/5? Sorry to burst everyone's bubble but FUND.COM doesn't qualify. So close, yet so far.


I agree partially with you. The future is leading toward smart phones, as I've always maintained since day one. However, I disagree with your belief that this translates to dotMobi becoming obsolete. I find that you have a lack of objectivity when you state your opinion regarding dotMobi. For instance, What percentage of mobile phones in operation "worldwide" exists in comparison to smart phones? How long till this conversion fully takes place or to the very least becomes the majority of mobile phones in use? Do you agree or disagree that style guides can always be revised to reflect current mobile technology? Do you agree or disagree that current dotCom websites are not all standardized when it comes to providing mobile users with a mobile experience? Do you agree or disagree that mobile phone users "on the go" have different needs than individuals on computers? And finally, why is it that when we speak of smart phones, you automatically assume this translates to dotMobi becoming obsolete?

Thank you for your comments and I look forward to your responses.

rocker314

obama i think will win

__________________
Scam Search

DBADT2007

I guess we will have to see how things play out.
????: NamePros.com http://www.namepros.com/showthread.php?t=498049

Interesting Campaign slogans:

Obama: Change
McCain: Country First

Part of me feels a bit conflicted...if the Country is to be put first, don't we need some kind of change? I guess if I were to reason it logically that isn't true, but then again life isn't always logical.

We all know that these have been troubling years, but the big question remains whether it can be blamed all on one man (Pres. George W Bush) or has it been a string of events that have lead us to where we are today. We can argue facts and figures till we are both red and blue and yet not arrive at an adequate conclusion. Yes, I have heard convincing arguments from both sides, republicans and democrats, and both make sense. So, taking a stance, is never as easy as one may think.

I've heard Obama at the democratic convention speak, now its time to hear Mccain speak at the republican convention. Until we have heard both sides, it is hardly fair to point out the pros and the cons of each candidate's stance on the issues.

On another note, how does everyone feel about the choices each presidential candidate has taken for their running mates? (Joe Biden for Democrats and Sarah Palin for Republicans, respectively).

rocker314

pretty interesting topic

__________________
Scam Search