Forum Moderators: not2easy

Message Too Old, No Replies

"View full site" link for responsive mobile design? Good or pointless?

         

dannyboy

2:13 am on Mar 3, 2015 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



I've been going back and forth on this. I've been thinking of adding a view desktop/view full site link in the footer of a responsive web site.

Has anyone ever done this? Has anyone considered it and chose not to?

I have a feeling like I'm about to waste a good amount of time implementing something that

1) will end up probably not even being noticed
2) will be used by a minuscule amount of people
3) doesn't provide any real-world benefit
4) will just add another wasteful javascript download to the head section that 99% of visitors won't use

Thanks.

not2easy

5:02 am on Mar 3, 2015 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Administrator 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



Do you offer different URLs for desktop and mobile? Do you automatically serve different pages based on screen size? If you have two separate versions of each page, mobile users should be able to view the desktop version if they want. I don't know that a lot of desktop users want to visit the mobile pages, but it is a fairly common complaint of mobile users that they can only see a mobile version.

dannyboy

5:55 am on Mar 3, 2015 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



@not2easy It's one url for everybody. Just media queries used. The view full site link would only be available for mobile users.

not2easy

6:20 am on Mar 3, 2015 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Administrator 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



Some mobile devices have better resolution for the same screen size than others so I would offer the choice. Sites (and breakpoints) are different, and since you know your site you should be able to decide whether there is more to see or not. I think it is a better user experience to offer a choice.

Depending on how easy it is to implement, you might want to check to see how much usage it gets on major pages and add it to more if/when you see it gets more use.

Marshall

1:52 pm on Mar 3, 2015 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



When I include "mobile friendly" pages, I always provide a link to the full site. I also make sure that link goes to the same page they were on in the mobile version, i.e. mobile/product1 to fullsite/product1, and vice-a-versa. No sense making a person search for the page they were on.

Marshall

not2easy

6:00 pm on Mar 3, 2015 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Administrator 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



Thank you for that tip Marshall, definitely don't want to send them all to the home page to start over. In this case dannyboy says it is the same URL so it would not be a link; my guess is that it is a javascript override of media queries and visitors would stay on the same page but not apply media queries.

dannyboy

6:36 pm on Mar 3, 2015 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



Thanks @not2easy and @Marshall. Now I'm learning toward going ahead and implementing it.

Depending on how easy it is to implement, you might want to check to see how much usage it gets on major pages and add it to more if/when you see it gets more use.


Good idea. Perhaps I could add some click event that sent an ajax message to something that logged it to a text file. That's the only way I'd know how to go about doing that.

not2easy

7:17 pm on Mar 3, 2015 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Administrator 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



If it is in the footer of all pages, you can skip the idea about adding it to more. Since it would be a js implementation it makes more sense to add it for all pages at one time, then check into usage. It could give you useful information to see how often it is used.

Fotiman

8:38 pm on Mar 3, 2015 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



Here's a thought on how you might do this. Include a class on your <html> element like:
<html class="r"> (r for responsive, but you can use whatever).

Include this in your media query selectors. Then to disable that responsive style, just remove that class from the <html> element. You'd still need some way to persist it from page to page (cookie?), but the script code to do it would be pretty minimal.

wesmaster

12:02 pm on Mar 10, 2015 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



I just make mine so that when the phone is held in landscape orientation the mobile stylesheet is no longer used (based on a media query). Then you can just put *that* in the footer ("rotate device to view desktop version").

lucy24

7:18 pm on Mar 10, 2015 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



<tangent>
The exact words "view full site" used in the thread title are not a good choice. "Full site? Huh? What am I on now-- the Greatest Hits version?"
</tangent>

Marshall

5:30 am on Mar 11, 2015 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



Full site? Huh? What am I on now
It is easier than calling it "View the site that you would see if you weren't so insistent on using a phone to surf the web thus making me work harder to satisfy even freak'n device on the market because you find it necessary to shop while in the bathroom!"

Personally, I do not own a cell phone. Gave them up after I left working for the government. Believe me when I say I have never been happier. :)

Marshall

Swanny007

10:13 pm on Mar 11, 2015 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



I don't like the idea. If I land on a mobile site and it looks good I see no reason to view a "full" site. It would just make me wonder what I'm missing. Then if I was to click it to see no additional content I would just be annoyed.

graeme_p

9:27 am on Mar 27, 2015 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



A "view full site" link is useful if you are using device detection: in case something your code classifies as a mobile device has a large his res-screen.

With a responsive design, they should see the design best suited to their screen anyway, so it seem unnecessary in most cases. I am sure there are exceptions (if say the small screen versions omits stuff that is useful but makes it look too cluttered for most users but that some would like), but for most sites I think its pointless.

There are cases where a mobile site on a desktop is useful - if your responsive design avoids loading large unneeded resources it may save laptop users on a mobile connection some bandwidth, and some people just like a fast, simple site (I have come across people who use the mobile version of twitter on desktops).

burcot

1:22 pm on Mar 27, 2015 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



The BBC news site have implemented a fully responsive design this week.

The feedback is overwhelmingly negative. In fact, I don't ever remember seeing such a passionate response to anything similar before

One constantly recurring question "why can't we choose to view the desktop version"

toidi

1:59 pm on Mar 27, 2015 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



I like to see a link to the 'desktop version'

coopster

8:52 pm on Mar 31, 2015 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Administrator 10+ Year Member



When mobile first went gaga we were rolling out responsive sites left and right. One of the main requests was to have the toggle between full and mobile versions. I employed the localStorage in HTML5 which worked on all the smart devices so I didn't even need to use a polyfill. I actually spoke on the topic in Vegas during the 2013 PubCon. Here is a cut from my slidedeck that may be useful or helpful for ideas. It's actually working code ... I hope I copy/paste it proper here ...

Style:
<div id="view-options"><span id="view-full">View Full Site</span></div>

/* View Mobile/Full Site options */
#view-options span {
background-color: #222222;
border-radius: 8px 8px 8px 8px; padding: 8px 16px;
color: #FFFFFF; display: block; font-size: 16px; font-weight: bold;
}
#view-default {display: none;}

@media only screen and (min-width: 768px) {
/* full viewport new definitions */
span#view-full{display:none;}
span#view-default{display:inline;}
}


JavaScript (jQuery version):
/**
* Mobile "Show Full Site" feature using HTML5 Web Storage
* http://dev.w3.org/html5/webstorage/
*/
(function(){
// default width value for full site viewport
var widthFull = 768;
// localStorage value already set?
try {
localStorage.showFullSite = localStorage.showFullSite == 'undefined'
? 'true'
: localStorage.showFullSite
;
} catch (e) {
// no polyfill necessary at this time; if needed:
// https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/DOM/Storage OR
// https://github.com/Modernizr/Modernizr/wiki/HTML5-Cross-browserPolyfills
}
var showFullSite = function(){
$('meta[name="viewport"]').attr('content','width='+widthFull);
if(!$('#view-options #view-default').length){
$('#view-options').append('<span id="view-default">View Mobile</span>');
}
localStorage.showFullSite = 'false'; // don't show full site button
};
var showDeviceWidth = function(){
$('meta[name="viewport"]').attr('content','width=device-width');
localStorage.showFullSite = 'true'; // show full site button
};
// User already selected view full site? Change the viewport
if(Modernizr.localstorage){
if(localStorage.showFullSite == 'false'){
showFullSite();
}
}
$('#view-full').on('click', function(){showFullSite();});
$('#view-options').on('click', '#view-default', function(){
showDeviceWidth();
});
})();

lucy24

10:06 pm on Mar 31, 2015 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



I have a feeling like I'm about to waste a good amount of time

How much time can it possibly take to add ONE global footer link? Less time than it took to compose this post, probably.

2) will be used by a minuscule amount of people

That minuscule number (not "amount") of people might otherwise leave the site because it doesn't look the way they want it to look.

3) doesn't provide any real-world benefit

Users don't count as "real world"?

4) will just add another wasteful javascript download to the head section that 99% of visitors won't use

Why the heck should it? It's a single link that can be generated at the time of page build by the same php-or-similar that created the page in the first place. If your developers think a "view full site" option requires an additional javascript download, you need some new developers.

graeme_p

5:14 am on Apr 1, 2015 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



@burcot, the BBC site is NOT fully responsive. It uses device detection. I just tried it in a desktop browser with a mobile UA string and it redirected me a mobile site with different URLs.

@lucy, I think you misunderstand. View desktop site is never adequately done by adding a single footer link. People want the desktop version of the page they are on. In this particular case, it is a responsive site (so no separate mobile URLs), so clicking the link has to do three things:

1) either change the CSS, or reload the page with different CSS
2) set a cookie (or use local storage) so that the "full site" preference is recorded
3) on each page load, load the appropriate CSS depending on whether the cookie is set or not.

Using JS is probably a good approach, as it avoids reloading the CSS (with no media queries) when a user switches to desktop.

graeme_p

5:28 am on Apr 1, 2015 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



OK, worked out what is happening at the BBC, only the news section of the site is responsive.

Most of the complaints I could see were about the details of the responsive design - i.e. the particular responsive design had failings, rather than responsive design per se being a problem