
The iPhone obsession - joelg87
http://www.quirksmode.org/blog/archives/2010/02/the_iphone_obse.html#
======
colinplamondon
It's not about the iPhone, it's about Webkit.

He seems to forget the fact that hardware sales doesn't translate into actual
internet usage. The internet outside of iPhone, Android, and Palm is so
terrible that barely anyone even bothers to use it. What do those three
platforms have in common? Webkit!

~~~
statictype
Nokia's browser is also based on WebKit.

~~~
sp332
The Nokia N900 runs a gecko-based browser.

~~~
pqs
And recently Mozilla released Fennec for Maemo. :-)

~~~
sp332
Actually, Fennec was the development name. The release is branded Mobile
Firefox or Firefox for Mobile. Mozilla only puts the Firefox brand on finished
releases.

------
seldo
So the IE6 comparison is _definitely_ the right way to sting developers into
action. Nobody wants to end up being That Guy from 2001 again.

There's a few differences though. IE6 did a few things better (their box-
sizing model is still more sane than the standard, box heights were nicer if
unpredictable). But many things it just did _differently_ , for no very
sensible reason.

Mobile Safari isn't like that -- it's pretty damn standards compliant (tried a
second ago, it passes most but not all of ACID2). That means anything you
write that is completely standards-compliant will work, without modification,
on any other similarly compliant browser, mobile or otherwise.

What is does do is a bunch of mobile-specific enhancement -- the viewport
sizing, css gradients, etc. are all highly useful for the unusual constraints
of mobile web development.

So, as PPK suggests, build the website in another browser first. Then enhance
it for Safari using their extensions -- not the other way around.

------
chime
First time I heard Quirksmode curse like a sailor. Regardless, the reason I
can't develop for a Nokia, Blackberry, or HTC is because I don't have a Nokia,
Blackberry, or HTC. I have an iPhone. It's pretty easy to develop webapps for
it because if it looks good in desktop Safari, it will probably look good in
iPhone Safari. I don't even know the browsers that other phones have. I know
Opera Mini is on many phones and Firefox too. I try to make my sites work well
with desktop versions of these browsers. But there's no way I can guarantee
that my sites will work well on all the browsers everywhere.

Already I have to worry about: * Firefox 3+ (all OSes) * Safari (OSX, Windows)
* Opera 9+ * Chrome 3+ * IE7+ * iPhone

There are just so many browsers I have to worry about. And even though I code
for standards, every browser still treats every little thing slightly
differently. I realize making something work in Opera if it already works in
FF/Chrome is probably not too difficult, but sometimes little things can take
up hours. So sorry Quirksmode, despite your well-written article, I will not
even bother with any other browsers just because you say so.

You know when I will bother? When my users tell me that my app doesn't work
well in platform X, browser Y and they would really want it to. That's when I
will go beyond my basic list of browsers. Otherwise I'm just wasting resources
developing for yet another platform.

~~~
sykora
Users who use platform X and browser Y where your app doesn't work will simply
switch to another app which does the same thing that was written by someone
who _does_ care about all browsers.

Those users won't complain to you, they'll just switch.

Your loss.

~~~
mos1
I was with you until you said 'Your loss.'

That bit of snark ignores the reality that a developer has resource
constraints, and they constantly have to decide how best to deploy their time,
money and energy.

Failing to address some platforms might well be a big win. Claiming it's a
definite loss is absurd.

~~~
jfoutz
The original article's point was about progressive enhancement. If you're
starting a project that requires, say canvas, it is your loss. If you start
with tables and images, the site will work on a lot of browsers.

------
awolf
"First, so what? No, let me rephrase that: So fucking what? Since when does
web development mean leaving 50% of your mobile users out in the cold? Since
when is “I only support browsers with a large market share” a valid argument?
(Answer: since we have an iPhone up our ass.)"

A device has more than 3x its market-share in traffic-share and we are
supposed to ignore that? That doesn't seem realistic. This gap between market-
share and traffic-share speak volumes about how far behind the other platforms
are in UX.

Maybe developers aren't just obsessed with the iPhone: maybe they just don't
want to develop for something that makes thier work look like shit.

~~~
pyre
He also makes these points:

    
    
      * Those usage numbers (50% of mobile browser traffic)
        could be a US-only statistic
      * People on other browsers might not browse the web as much because
        not enough effort is made to making web content usable on those
        browsers.
    

Viewing your argument alongside the second point poses a possible chicken-and-
the-egg problem. No one is using other mobile browsers because the experience
sucks, but the experience sucks because not enough development is done to make
it bearable (or pleasant). Not enough development time is being spent to make
the experience bearable or pleasant because no one is using those other mobile
browsers.

~~~
pyre
I guess I can bolster this with the usage scenarios that are probably
happening:

People get their phone and try to use the mobile browser, but the experience
sucks so they give up (or only use it whne they _really_ need to get some info
from the web).

Developers look at the usage statistics, see that no one is using the other
browsers and proudly declare that the people whole own phones with those other
browsers don't want to access the information that they are presenting to the
world, so therefore there is no point in targeting them as an audience.

The problem is that this is the _wrong_ conclusion to make. Just because
people _aren't_ accessing your content in a certain way does not mean that
they don't want to.

------
sri
Please Don't Mistake My Apathy For A Lack of Understanding:

[http://www.thisismobility.com/blog/2009/04/11/please-dont-
mi...](http://www.thisismobility.com/blog/2009/04/11/please-dont-mistake-my-
apathy-for-a-lack-of-understanding/)

------
pieter
_Lots of mobile browsers have iPhone in their UA strings to work around
browser detects that obsessed web developers have set up. Do all traffic
market share reporters work around that problem? Most probably do, but we
can’t be sure._

Which browsers do that?

~~~
jbox
None.

Having worked on mobile web applications that serve a wide range of devices, I
can honestly say that this is not the case.

I would challange ppk to cite examples of this behaviour.

~~~
gizmo
Actually, you can change your user agent with Opera Mobile if I'm not
mistaken.

~~~
sp332
You can change your UA in most major browsers. Not really the point.

------
fab13n
Sales figures are not relevant. What matter are:

\- proportion of devices currently subscribed to a data plan;

\- time spent online / number of pageviews per device;

\- for businesses who don't plan to be profitable in the next couple of
months, what OSes will be actually used for mobile web surfing in the future;

\- which users have been trained by an AppStore-like system to easily spend
money online.

Nobody in his right mind tries to surf with Windows Mobile if they can avoid
it; the vast majority of Nokia or Sony-Ericcson phones, those which constitute
the bulk of their sales, are barely usable surfing platforms, and are
generally not sold with unlimited data plan; Spending money on Palm support
supposes that you bet on their middle-term survival, a bet not everyone is
willing to make; RIM is totally specialized into the corporate market, and is
relevant if and only if you target this audience.

~~~
tomkarlo
I agree right up to the comment about RIM: if you look at their recent efforts
they are clearly holding their own in the teenage / budget smartphone market
for families that want the email/txt capabilities of iPhones at a lower price
point (or don't want to be on ATT.) I don't think RIM does a great job of
serving this market but their price point is still well below Apple's and
they're on more networks, and hopefully they will eventually get their act
together in the browser area (although that will not help all the old units
they have out there.)

------
anotherperson
Here’s the thing: developing for the iPhone means that you are developing for
any browser that supports web standards. Why bend over backwards for browsers
on phones with archaic web browsing capabilities. If anything, it will force
vendors to get with the HTML5 and CSS3 programs.

~~~
mhw
And of course, once the vendors get with the HTML5 and CSS3 programs they'll
release new firmware packages including the new version of the browsers for
_all_ the old devices that have archaic browsers, and then your users will
_all_ go and download the new firmware and install it on their phone, and,
bingo, you don't need to worry about supporting the archaic browsers.

You're obviously new in town, so I'll point out the two flaws in your
reasoning:

1) The vendors won't ship updated firmware for all the old devices they've
already shipped to market. There are just too many different combinations of
devices and firmware versions (each network typically gets a custom firmware
build to include their links and logos), so the cost would be huge.

2) Even if they did ship updated firmware, most users won't bother installing
it.

The mobile market just isn't like the desktop market - what you're effectively
saying is that people can't use your web application until they upgrade to a
new phone.

------
mrduncan
_For instance, SMS only really took off with the Obama campaign, while the
rest of the world became addicted to it years ago._

Anyone happen to have stats to support that, I find it very hard to believe
based on (admittedly anecdotal) evidence.

~~~
tjogin
SMS:ing is bigger than (mobile) phone calls in Sweden, especially among young
people — all they do is text each other, back and forth, even when calling
might be cheaper. It's been this way for years.

Key reasons: _receiving_ an SMS is free (I believe this to be true of most
countries _except_ the US).

Sending SMS as well as making calls is much _much_ cheaper.

SMS are usually delivered the moment they are sent.

------
randallsquared
_Besides, what will happen when the operators abandon the economically
untenable flat rate for iPhone data traffic?_

Er, what? Operators are _expanding_ those flat rate plans to other phones (I
have a unlimited everything month-to-month plan for $80 right now, on a non-
AT&T operator).

------
ROFISH
While this article curses a lot to get attention, I think it will fall on deaf
ears because I do not have other phones to test on. Unless a simulator or
emulator is readily available for download on my platform of choice, I will
not test against it.

------
andrewl-hn
Here's a list of popular smartphone OSes:

\- S60

\- WinMo

\- iPhone

\- Android

\- Blackberry

iPhone and Android are pretty much covered with good WebKit implementation.
Check in one of those and most likely your page will work in the other.

PPK claims that S60 WebKit is much inferior, but there's Opera Mobile 10 for
S60 and for WinMo.

Blackberry doesn't have a good browser at the moment (although they are likely
to get one). Opera is making an optimized version of Mini for it, though.

Practically all other phones run Opera Mini too. Version 5 uses the same
engine as Mobile but it has a much lesser JavaScript capabilities. Personally
I prefer it to the default S60 Webkit on Nokia 5800 ExpressMusic.

At the moment it's all seem not that complicated to me: check in Apple WebKit
(Android/iPhone), Opera Mobile and Mini, and hope that other browsers will
catch up eventually.

Mini can be run in Java emulator, and desktop Opera browser has a "small-
screen" rendering mode (should work like Opera Mobile). Same goes with desktop
Safari and iPhone.

~~~
telemachos
> _iPhone and Android are pretty much covered with good WebKit implementation.
> Check in one of those and most likely your page will work in the other._

This is tangential. I would have thought you were right, but in my anecdotal
experience, it's very much not the case. I have an Eris; wife has an iTouch.
Our browsing experiences are night and day surprisingly often.

I'm picking this nit mostly because it surprised the hell out of me.

------
jsz0
Wouldn't it be hard to target Nokia/RIM/etc? They have dozens of handsets.
Different screen resolutions and even different rendering engines. Apple just
made it easier by keeping the render/resolution consistent for the last 3
years. The other factor is Nokia/RIM/Microsoft really lagged behind Apple,
Palm and Android in offering a modern standards compliant browser on their
handsets. I think the assumption is people buying a Windows Mobile phone for
example don't really care much about the web. (or they would have bought a
phone with a modern browser) Why go out of your way to please them? We know
iPhone/Touch uses really like the mobile web.

~~~
AndrewDucker
I have Opera on my Nokia mobile. Just as I did on my last Nokia mobile.

And yes, mobile phones come in different shapes and sizes, just like monitors
come in different shapes and sizes. Design flexibly, so that your app is
usable by people accessing it from anywhere.

~~~
jsz0
Any phone's browser(s) should be capable of displaying the regular non-mobile
site. I assume the author is referring to the iPhone specific/enhanced sites
out there.

~~~
AndrewDucker
Displaying a non-mobile site on a screen that small is...of less than perfect
utility.

------
PanMan
All stats I see (and I looked at quite a bit of them) have iPhone traffic at
50% or more of mobile trafic. See e.g. Morgan Stanly:
[http://techcrunch.com/2009/10/21/how-the-iphone-is-
blowing-e...](http://techcrunch.com/2009/10/21/how-the-iphone-is-blowing-
everyone-else-away-in-charts/) While I agree you shouldn't _exclude_ the
smaller browsers, it's not strange to optimize for your largest market share.
PPK is right Nokia sells a lot of phones. However, people who buy nokia's
aren't _using_ them to browse the web: They use them for phonecalls. Iphone
users do.

------
al_james
When you spend money developing a mobile app, you have to future proof it so
that keeps up with the apps/sites of similar functionality, otherwise people
will end going to your competitors (obviously that statement depends on your
service, but its certainly the case in my sector). People with smartphones
wont want to use a site that is so stripped down it would work well on a
crappy handset.

We are sitting on the edge of a large explosion of smartphone devices and
(potentially) users (with _lots_ of Android handsets coming out this year). In
the UK you can now get a Android powered device for £20 / month with a free
handset. If you _want_ a smartphone (and therefore probably interested in
using the web), you will be able to afford one this year (at least in
Europe!). This is going to be huge.

The iPhone is the standard they all will judge themselves against, and
therefore the iPhone is the _benchmark_ device.

I would suspect that the 50% smartphone / 50% other phone traffic statistic
will be _way_ higher towards smartphones in 12 months time.

------
jcromartie
I'm not sure what he's talking about. I don't mean for that to sound snarky. I
just feel like I'm being yelled at when I honestly don't know what I did
wrong. When I start building a web app I start with standards, assuming that
my early adopters will likely be using Safari, Firefox or Chrome. Mobile
Safari usually Just Works(tm). Is he talking about custom iPhone stylesheets
or what?

~~~
jmtulloss
Yes, there are many sites that are designed for mobile devices that target the
iPhone specifically instead of all mobile devices.

------
NalandaU
I had a Nokia phone for years and then a Motorala phone and then a couple of
windows mobile phones from HTC and others. But, in none of them I have ever
downloaded an app, leave alone having the interest to code up an app. With my
iPod touch however (don't want to deal with ATT) I have downloaded dozens of
apps and feel good to code on it (though I had to buy my first Mac for this
and had a hard time with Objective C's syntax).

I used to work in the windows mobile development team at Microsoft and at that
time used to have a dismissive tone about iPhone and said it was just an
expensive version of HTC Touch. But, once I started using it and downloading
apps, I found the real difference. It is in a whole different league and
engineers in other phone companies know that. (I can speak for atleast one of
them)

------
ZeroGravitas
Are people actually designing for Webkit mobile? I thought the big
breakthrough with Mobile Safari was that basically every website on the web
just works.

Okay I have to turn the phone sideways to read Hacker News comfortably, but
apart from that it generally just works. Mobile enhanced sites are nice but if
we had to rely on them then we wouldn't be getting any mobile web at all.

If the other phones can't render that non-iPhone optimised sites then they've
got bigger problems than not being able to see the iPhone version, because
only some vanishingly tiny percentage of the web is available in that format.

(I believe Opera's command of the market on lower end phones was partly due to
very smart reformatting of standard webpages (done both server- and client-
side.)

------
eldenbishop
He is missing/ignoring the obvious. Although the iPhone may only be 15% of the
smartphone market in terms of units shipped, it represents something on the
order of 98% of the market in terms of user dollars spent on applications.
This is the only number that matters if you are selling an app. The number of
installed platforms is meaningless.

------
jonknee
At least in the US, a _lot_ of designers have an iPhone (and so do their
friends). I think it's also likely that the iPhone was the first mobile device
they have ever used the internet on. It's easy to fall into the trap of
thinking that since me and all my friends only use the iPhone everyone else
does to.

~~~
tomkarlo
I don't agree. The iPhone was at least my 4th or 5th device that had some kind
of "mobile web" function. Most folks had smartphones, blackberries, etc before
they got an iphone if they had any interest in the net. The problem was, the
reality of tying to actually _use_ these devices to access web sites was such
a horrible UX that you didn't do it unless there was absolutely no other
option. In comparison, lots of us will idly web browse on an iPhone while
waiting on line at the store, etc -- something that probably would never have
happened on a Blackberry.

~~~
jonknee
Are you a designer?

------
bensummers
Dupe detection can be thrown off by just a # character!

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1109637>

------
jodrellblank
Even in 2000, developers had Netscape Navigator, so developing for IE because
they had to and NN because they wanted to was the best option (unless
distorted by being paid to meet other requirements).

Now, developers have iPhones and like iphones, developing for other devices
isn't so personally pressing.

Perhaps this will force other manufacturers to improve in the way we always
wanted to do to IE6 but couldn't?

------
DannoHung
Who are all these people with Nokia's?

I have never met one.

~~~
michael_dorfman
Seriously? Or is this sarcasm.

Here in Norway, Nokia has the largest share of the mobile phone market
overall, and their smartphones are quite nice (and popular). At the moment,
I'm trying to decide between buying an iPhone and a Nokia N97.

~~~
randallsquared
Wouldn't the N900 be a better match for the iPhone?

~~~
michael_dorfman
Maybe. But I'm not looking to match the iPhone. I'm just looking for a good
phone. I currently have an HTC S710, and I like the full QWERTY keyboard, so
that's a factor in favor of the N97. But, on the other hand, there are a lot
of iPhone apps out there. So, I'm still on the fence.

------
howcool
This guy is sounding more and more foolish, and pretty wacky. he used to be
cool. What the heck happened to him I wonder? Maybe he can't get an iPhone
where he lives.

------
jrnkntl
message: don't forget to support the less fortunate phones while developing
for the mobile web.

------
tjoozeylabs
Screw this article, inaccurate and not true for other mobile platforms. They
are over saturated with developers just as iTunes is. We do not need any more
dev's.

