Re: Responsive sites

[Evert]

Well yes, it is normal to jump on new technology, and we need to because otherwise it would never get off the ground.
What I don’t think is a good thing however is how it is being sold as a solution without any proof. Not just sold to designers (get with it or you are a bad designer) but also to clients, which I think is much worse (he/she has to pay for something I can not actually guarantee does something worth its value).

Perhaps “proof” is not the right word to use (I am not natively English so sometimes I just want for words). What I am looking for is tests done that show that people are comfortable (not get lost, etc.) using responsive sites (as the test I talked about showed they were not), and that show that one layout works as well as the other in terms of conversions and such. This in comparison to other layouts obviously.
So suppose I have a webshop, does (relatively speaking in terms of visitors) sell my desktop layout as much as my phone layout? And does a desktop layout on a phone sell better or worse?

And yes, I understand that each site is unique and should be tested in its own right. But then the whole discussion about responsiveness would be mute as well.

I didn’t intend to compare tables with responsiveness but the problems we had with tables with possible problems we could have with responsiveness if used wrong. But come to think of it I suppose not since we can easily deactivate a certain layout by simply changing its media query?

I cannot tell you to much about that site right now, I am sorry. It is an interactive site aimed at people between 25 and 40 in a relationship with an above average income.