Comments on: Ruby on Rails and Web sites that won’t work on the T-Mobile Sidekick http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/philg/2006/11/15/ruby-on-rails-and-web-sites-that-wont-work-on-the-t-mobile-sidekick/ A posting every day; an interesting idea every three months... Fri, 04 Dec 2009 15:40:58 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Michael Behan http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/philg/2006/11/15/ruby-on-rails-and-web-sites-that-wont-work-on-the-t-mobile-sidekick/comment-page-1/#comment-30917 Michael Behan Thu, 23 Aug 2007 06:40:46 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/philg/2006/11/15/ruby-on-rails-and-web-sites-that-wont-w#comment-30917 Check out the WURFL project: http://wurfl.sourceforge.net/ Check out the WURFL project:

http://wurfl.sourceforge.net/

]]> By: cctvpro http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/philg/2006/11/15/ruby-on-rails-and-web-sites-that-wont-work-on-the-t-mobile-sidekick/comment-page-1/#comment-18266 cctvpro Wed, 29 Nov 2006 11:46:19 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/philg/2006/11/15/ruby-on-rails-and-web-sites-that-wont-w#comment-18266 I share in your frustration. I hope that the new .modi domain names address the issue. I have to hope that companies that are smart enough to register these domains are smart enough to only use lighter more compatible technology when implementing the sites. I share in your frustration. I hope that the new .modi domain names address the issue. I have to hope that companies that are smart enough to register these domains are smart enough to only use lighter more compatible technology when implementing the sites.

]]> By: Randall http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/philg/2006/11/15/ruby-on-rails-and-web-sites-that-wont-work-on-the-t-mobile-sidekick/comment-page-1/#comment-18220 Randall Tue, 28 Nov 2006 21:05:38 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/philg/2006/11/15/ruby-on-rails-and-web-sites-that-wont-w#comment-18220 According to Firefox Quick Find, the words "degrade gracefully" haven't shown up in the thread, so here goes: degrade gracefully. There are plenty of ways to use JavaScript without requiring it -- for instance, your "edit item" link can being up a page with an edit form in old browsers, and generate the form inline on new ones. There are economic incentives against coding and testing that functionality -- the real solution is to bake graceful degradation into your frameworks; the same code that builds an inline form with JavaScript can spit out the same form as a standalone page from the server. Perhaps if you do the hard work of building the framework now, you, yes you, will be the new hottness when downlevel mobile browsers get more popular. (Or perhaps mobile browsers will skip a couple grades and go straight to being webapp-capable!) According to Firefox Quick Find, the words “degrade gracefully” haven’t shown up in the thread, so here goes: degrade gracefully.

There are plenty of ways to use JavaScript without requiring it — for instance, your “edit item” link can being up a page with an edit form in old browsers, and generate the form inline on new ones. There are economic incentives against coding and testing that functionality — the real solution is to bake graceful degradation into your frameworks; the same code that builds an inline form with JavaScript can spit out the same form as a standalone page from the server. Perhaps if you do the hard work of building the framework now, you, yes you, will be the new hottness when downlevel mobile browsers get more popular. (Or perhaps mobile browsers will skip a couple grades and go straight to being webapp-capable!)

]]> By: brian cantoni http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/philg/2006/11/15/ruby-on-rails-and-web-sites-that-wont-work-on-the-t-mobile-sidekick/comment-page-1/#comment-18043 brian cantoni Mon, 20 Nov 2006 18:41:48 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/philg/2006/11/15/ruby-on-rails-and-web-sites-that-wont-w#comment-18043 I'm maintaining a list of mobile-friendly websites here: http://www.cantoni.org/palm/ I'm finding that purpose-built mobile sites are the best. Rather than creating a mobile version of an entire site, create one that provides *just* the info useful to a mobile person. I’m maintaining a list of mobile-friendly websites here:
http://www.cantoni.org/palm/

I’m finding that purpose-built mobile sites are the best. Rather than creating a mobile version of an entire site, create one that provides *just* the info useful to a mobile person.

]]> By: gman http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/philg/2006/11/15/ruby-on-rails-and-web-sites-that-wont-work-on-the-t-mobile-sidekick/comment-page-1/#comment-17989 gman Mon, 20 Nov 2006 07:06:38 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/philg/2006/11/15/ruby-on-rails-and-web-sites-that-wont-w#comment-17989 Mobile phones improve every year. By the time you got your entire web2.0 site dumbed down so it works on a mobile phone the phones would have progressed to the point you didn't need to in the first place. Mobile phones improve every year. By the time you got your entire web2.0 site dumbed down so it works on a mobile phone the phones would have progressed to the point you didn’t need to in the first place.

]]> By: Michael Molin http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/philg/2006/11/15/ruby-on-rails-and-web-sites-that-wont-work-on-the-t-mobile-sidekick/comment-page-1/#comment-17893 Michael Molin Sat, 18 Nov 2006 03:51:16 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/philg/2006/11/15/ruby-on-rails-and-web-sites-that-wont-w#comment-17893 It's just the main reason for developing Mobile 2.0. My suggestion is to use a two-display solution as a standard hardware platform and divide the core content of a Web site for the better presentation on the main display and its framework - menu and the ads - for navigating on the second display-keyboard and easily access to the banner advertisements for consumers. Cell Computer Project http://geocities.com/gene_technics Regards, It’s just the main reason for developing Mobile 2.0. My suggestion is to use a two-display solution as a standard hardware platform and divide the core content of a Web site for the better presentation on the main display and its framework – menu and the ads – for navigating on the second display-keyboard and easily access to the banner advertisements for consumers.

Cell Computer Project

http://geocities.com/gene_technics

Regards,

]]> By: Tim http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/philg/2006/11/15/ruby-on-rails-and-web-sites-that-wont-work-on-the-t-mobile-sidekick/comment-page-1/#comment-17882 Tim Sat, 18 Nov 2006 00:05:44 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/philg/2006/11/15/ruby-on-rails-and-web-sites-that-wont-w#comment-17882 I'm not up on the capabilities of modern web browsing phones but..you mentioned that one of them had XP under the hood.... Is there a Windows remote desktop client available for the phone you're now using? I do nearly all my out-of office work and browsing via remote desktop these days....why maintain several desktops, favorites, settings files, purchase apps, etc, when you can have your desktop with you anywhere in the world? (just don't stream video :) I’m not up on the capabilities of modern web browsing phones but..you mentioned that one of them had XP under the hood….

Is there a Windows remote desktop client available for the phone you’re now using?
I do nearly all my out-of office work and browsing via remote desktop these days….why maintain several desktops, favorites, settings files, purchase apps, etc, when you can have your desktop with you anywhere in the world?
(just don’t stream video :)

]]> By: 1gor http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/philg/2006/11/15/ruby-on-rails-and-web-sites-that-wont-work-on-the-t-mobile-sidekick/comment-page-1/#comment-17876 1gor Fri, 17 Nov 2006 22:33:36 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/philg/2006/11/15/ruby-on-rails-and-web-sites-that-wont-w#comment-17876 I seem to remember how I couldn't get into ACS-based website in 1999 because my browser could not save cookies. Websites with ugly browser-based login windows (apache .htaccess etc.) were OK. Was ACS also a sort of "grand tool" of its time? I seem to remember how I couldn’t get into ACS-based website in 1999 because my browser could not save cookies. Websites with ugly browser-based login windows (apache .htaccess etc.) were OK.

Was ACS also a sort of “grand tool” of its time?

]]> By: Tristan http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/philg/2006/11/15/ruby-on-rails-and-web-sites-that-wont-work-on-the-t-mobile-sidekick/comment-page-1/#comment-17870 Tristan Fri, 17 Nov 2006 21:26:31 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/philg/2006/11/15/ruby-on-rails-and-web-sites-that-wont-w#comment-17870 The fact that the Sidekick can multi task so well means that even if a website is loading slowly, you can be doing email, chatting on IM, checking your Calender, writing a text message all while it loads in the background. Congrats on getting a good device. The keykboard on the Sidekick 3 is the most usable of any PDA I've ever tried, and multi tasking on the Sidekick 3 simply rocks. I even tried a Blackberry previously and it was not as good. You might want to check out http://www.hiptop.com/forums which is the online community for all things Sidekick. The fact that the Sidekick can multi task so well means that even if a website is loading slowly, you can be doing email, chatting on IM, checking your Calender, writing a text message all while it loads in the background.

Congrats on getting a good device. The keykboard on the Sidekick 3 is the most usable of any PDA I’ve ever tried, and multi tasking on the Sidekick 3 simply rocks. I even tried a Blackberry previously and it was not as good.

You might want to check out

http://www.hiptop.com/forums

which is the online community for all things Sidekick.

]]> By: James http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/philg/2006/11/15/ruby-on-rails-and-web-sites-that-wont-work-on-the-t-mobile-sidekick/comment-page-1/#comment-17803 James Thu, 16 Nov 2006 17:39:05 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/philg/2006/11/15/ruby-on-rails-and-web-sites-that-wont-w#comment-17803 I use my Treo a lot for mobile web browsing, which I would imagine is similar in capabilities to the Sidekick. Web developers do need to realise that more and more mobile devices will be being used. So many sites are so bloated these days, it's not even funny... Some great mobile websites : http://news.bbc.co.uk/text_only.stm http://mobile.wunderground.com/ http://www.otweb.com/pda.html http://www.google.com/pda (Regular www.google.com is also good). I use my Treo a lot for mobile web browsing, which I would imagine is similar in capabilities to the Sidekick. Web developers do need to realise that more and more mobile devices will be being used. So many sites are so bloated these days, it’s not even funny…

Some great mobile websites :

http://news.bbc.co.uk/text_only.stm
http://mobile.wunderground.com/
http://www.otweb.com/pda.html
http://www.google.com/pda (Regular http://www.google.com is also good).

]]>