matt's posterous pacygas

plague88

Sender 11: Mobile screen size trends #mobile #trends

Over at mBricks my colleagues have put a lot of work into the device database (we work with WURFL data and contribute back as well as we can). I took the opportunity to take a closer look at screen size trends. The data I have covers about 400 different device models sold from 2005 to today.

This shows the the most significant screen sizes, from the smallest to the largest. I have added a couple of upcoming phones as well, they are the ones with the dotted lines.

Over the years the relative screen size difference has increased. The difference between the smallest (128 x 128) and the largest (800 x 480) is now a factor of 23. That means the largest screen is 23 times bigger than the smallest one.

You can see that the smaller screens have a portrait orientation and the large screens have a landscape orientation. Between them are the phones that can change orientation, they can work in both landscape and portrait. 240 x 320 is the dominant screen size overall.

Resolution

I did a rough dpi (ppi to be exact) calculation for some popular phone models. The pixel density actually increases when the pixel count increases. The screens are not only getting bigger, they are getting sharper at the same time.

There is an upper limit to what dpi is meaningful. At a certain density, the eye can no longer see any difference. If the specs are correct, the upcoming Sony Ericsson Xperia X1 will have a pixel density of 298. That is the highest I've seen on a mobile phone yet. The human eye can resolve about 340 dpi at one foot viewing distance IIRC, but tests show that most people don't see much difference between a 150 and a 300 dpi image. So 298 dpi should be plenty.

Unfortunately, for LCD screens, increased pixel density doesn't give us more brightness. More brightness makes the screen easier to read outdoors and is more important than resolution from a usability perspective. OLED displays will help with this, but we are drifting off topic.

 

Yes, a grand total of 26 different screen sizes. I only counted phones that had a color screen, ran Java and had a browser.

As you can see, just a handful of variants makes up the majority of phones. Lets take a look at them:

 

It is obvious that 240 x 320 (also called QVGA) is on a roll. It is by far the most common and it is growing rapidly. If you develop, this should be your target screen size.

 

When you develop, you primarily need to worry about the width of the screen. For most practical purposes, the height takes care of itself. I have lumped together 176 x 208 and 176 x 220 for this graph. There is still a lot of them in the market, but their numbers have been decreasing since January 2007. In 18 months this screen size may be out of the market. Nokia haven't launched a phone with this screen size in 1,5 years. I have also lumped together 128 x 128 and 128 x 160.

Phone screen sizes has had a tendency to come in pairs. Each manufacturer had their own variation on large-screen high-end models and small-screen low-end" models.

Manufacturer small screen big screen
Sony Ericsson 128 x 160 176 x 220
Nokia 128 x 128 176 x 208
Samsung 128 x 160 176 x 220
Siemens 130 x 130 132 x 176
 

Individual variations is disappearing, the trend is:

Manufacturer small screen big screen
Everybody+dog: 240 x 320 ?

 

The majority of odd-sized screens are disappearing. No phones with the above screen sizes have been introduced for at least 4 quarters.

The dead and dying are partly BenQ-Siemens (who has left the market), partly the old Sony Ericsson P-series and partly the Nokia hires versions: E60/70 and N80/90.

The odd ones

What about the other ones, the not so popular, but not dying? These are the ones that do you in.

Fashion phones:
128x220 Samsung F210
240x400 LG favorite. Prada and Viewty.
Handheld touchscreens of the iPhone variety:
240x440 Various Palm and HP
240x480 LG KF700
Typical Palm/Blackberry form factor. US enterprise with portrait or square displays:
240x240 Samsung F210
240x260 Blackberry Pearl 8100
320x240 Various
320x320 Palm and Samsung
Clamshell:
640x480 HTC X7500, Qtek 9000, etc.
800x352 Nokia E90 Communicator
800x400 Sony Ericsson Xperia X1
 

Future

What will be the dominant screen sizes in the future? Well, the 128 width screen sizes are moving down from feature phones to basic phones and there are very few manufacturers that still uses 176 width screens. It looks like 240 x 320 is the new base line.

What will the dominant large screen size be? Let's hope there will be one. Right now there are a lot of different ones, every manufacturer has their own and I can't see a clear trend. The two hottest form factors right now is the handheld touch screens (ala iPhone) and the QWERTY clamshell (ala HTC).

For the handhelds, the 320 x 480 iPhone size is a possibility. It has an ok resolution for a 3,5 inch size. The Nokia "Tube" phone will have a 360 x 640 size (my estimate) and is another possibility.

For the clamshell form factor, 640 x 480 screen size would be my bet.

About the data

The data includes all the 400 different phone models sold in the Norwegian market from 2005 to 2008. I've given them four quarters of life time past the quarter they were introduced. That means an average of 14,5 months. This might be a little short.

I have left out basic phones. Only phones that has a color screen, support for java and a browser are included.

The Norwegian market is not very different from most other European markets. It's GSM only, the majority of handsets are sold with 12 month operator binding. Sony Ericsson, Nokia and Samsung are market leaders. Motorola is weak, HTC is up and coming in the enterprise market. The data includes the iPhone even though it has no official distribution. There is quite a bit of "black" iPhone imports.

Reliable sales figures for each individual device is not available, so the data is not weighted on popularity. But I don't think popularity would give a very different conclusion. I've checked "top ten" lists where available and none of the "odd" screen sizes seem to be big sellers.

Note: all sizes are written as width x height. So a 240 x 320 screen is portrait while a 320 x 240 screen is landscape.

Filed under  //   UX   Usabilty   mobile  

Mobile Web Design: Getting to the Point - Part II | mobiForge

Mobile Web Design: Getting to the Point - Part II

Section Feature image
Posted by paulca 1 year 9 weeks ago

Following on from part I, I want to put into practice the principles that I isolated by looking at GMail, Twitter and Facebook. I’ll apply the principles to one of the most common of web applications: the online store. I want to look at three typical online store pages and then go through some ideas about how best to apply mobile web design principles to the pages.

I'll go through the process of building the site from the ground up... from simple sketches through wireframing and the final design.

I've used 240×320 as a guide screen size while mocking this up. Because of the massive range of mobile device sizes out there, it can become impractical to support every single screen size out there. (For a deeper screen-size analysis, the DeviceAtlas Data Explorer does a great job of providing useful analytics such as this). 240×320 strikes a balance of practicality and the assurance that your site will look good on a good set of mobile handsets. It's important to note here that compared to modern desktop screen sizes, this is tiny; it's about one tenth of the usual available size. The image below illustrates just how much smaller this actually is:

Reflecting on the search page (above), the single most important thing is the results, so they should be given the highest priority. Any subsidiary elements, such as the search field itself, do just fine below the results. We have kept a one liner that tells the customer what they searched for and how many results there were, although this could be further simplified if desired.

main.js.txt710 bytes

Filed under  //   UX   Usabilty   mobile  

Effective Design for Multiple Screen Sizes | mobiForge

Effective Design for Multiple Screen Sizes

Section Feature image
Posted by bryanrieger 1 year 3 days ago

So you're a designer and have been tasked with the design of a mobile web site. Chances are, unless you're designing for only one device you're quickly going to be faced with a common problem experienced by designers who work with mobile devices; figuring out what screen size to actually design for.

For instance:

  • The iPhone is 320 pixels wide by 480 pixels high.
  • Many Nokia N-Series devices are 240 pixels wide by 320 pixels high.
  • Newer devices often support a landscape mode where the width and height are spontaneously reversed.
  • Older (yet still popular) Nokia devices have displays ranging from 176 by 208 pixels up to 352 by 416 pixels.
  • Blackberry screen resolutions range anywhere from 160 x 160 pixels all the way up to 324 x 352 pixels.

Screenshots of the BBC, Zipiko, XBox and UPS mobile sites.

This article is intended to help you develop effective design strategies to target a diverse range of mobile devices and screen sizes. To this end, we begin with an outline of two key issues you will encounter when designing for small screens—the diversity in screen and pixel size.

Expect and manage diversity

At this point you're probably asking yourself "...is it really necessary to design for all of these difference screen sizes?" or "...do I really need to create a separate design for each variant?" Depending on the business requirements of your project, it may be completely feasible to design only for one screen size—or in fact one device. However, if requirements dictate that the application (or web site) be usable by a majority of devices, you're going to have to find some way to deal with this diversity.

But wait, things may not be as bad as they first appear. When designing for the mobile web we can assume that pages will scroll up and down—as they do within desktop browsers. This somewhat removes the need to worry about the height of the screen, allowing us to primarily focus our efforts on dealing with the diversity found in device screen widths. Fortunately DeviceAtlas Explorer provides us a means to quickly visualize how the screen width property actually breaks down across the thousands of known devices.

Graph from DeviceAtlas Explorer showing number of devices based on the screen width property.

As the graphs above indicate, the vast majority of devices share just three screen widths; 128, 240 and 176 pixels—with many of the remaining values; 120, 130, 160, 208 and 220 pixels—not diverging too far from these three core values. That leaves us with a few devices at both the high and low ends of the spectrum with a width of 96, 101, 320 and 320+ pixels. While devices with screen widths of less than 128 pixels may seem a small percentage of the whole, when combined (96, 120, 101 and 84 pixels) they add up to 469 devices! Over half the number of 240 pixel devices—or about 10% of all known devices!

Chart showing percentage of devices with various screen sizes.

It's probably also worth noting that at this time, less than 5% of devices have resolutions greater than 320 pixels wide. Expect this to change over the next few years as we're now seeing smaller screen resolutions (128, 176, etc) give way to the larger (240+); as illustrated in the following chart.

Graph comparing screen width and year released properties from Device Atlas Explorer.

Considering screen size is important but there is one additional parameter to consider—the physical dimension of the screen.

The 'Problem With Pixels'

For years, designers have primarily been creating visuals for large desktop devices. Screen sizes averaging 1024 x 768 pixels have become the norm and although physical display sizes vary; the overall dimensions typically result in a pixel density of about 85 ppi (pixels-per-inch). Lately however, the display landscape has begun to change;

  • 'Netbooks' such as the Asus Eee PC 900 have displays in the range of 9" diagonal with a resolutions around 1024 x 600 pixels giving them pixel densities of about 133 ppi.
  • The Apple iPhone has a screen resolution of 320 x 480 pixels which when combined with its 3.6" diagonal display results in a pixel density of 160 ppi.
  • The E60 from Nokia has a screen resolution of 416 x352 pixels packed into a tiny 2.2" diagonal display giving it a whopping pixel density of over 240 ppi!

When combined with the need to support many devices, this wide variance in pixel density introduces a new problem; the impact of pixel size on design.

The following illustration simulates the same 100 x 100 pixel image on devices with pixel densities of 72, 144 and 240 pixels-per-inch. Notice how type and fine details are lost as the image is rendered smaller and smaller.

Illustration showing a simulation of images viewed on 72, 144 and 240 ppi (pixels-per-inch) screen resolutions.

Fortunately the race for "most pixels ever" has slowed and we're not seeing too many devices with pixel densities over 200 ppi. From a practical point of view, this means that it is unlikely you will have to support the very wide range of pixel densities illustrated above. It is however important keep in mind that not all pixels are created equal, and where possible:

  • Determine the full range of pixel densities you will need to support.
  • Review your designs on these devices to ensure critical detail is not lost.
  • Design and define layout elements based on relative units such as ems and percentages. This will provide the team with a truer indication of the size and relationships between layout elements.

This 'problem with pixels' is sure to become more widely discussed in the coming years as handset vendors seek to build new levels of flexibility into their operating systems. In fact, Google's Android has already implemented a ">potentially interesting solution to the problem of pixels. The Android operating system is based on abstract 'dp' (density-independent pixel) units which are completely relative based on a 160 ppi screen density. This allows designers to specify fonts and a host of other interface elements in a relative manner with the knowledge that they will naturally adjust to suit the device.

With an understanding of the diversity in screen size and pixel density, we now outline strategies you can implement today to build scaleable mobile web sites.

Strategy 1: Define device groups

As we discovered earlier, while there may be thousands of device models, the diversity isn't as bad as it may have first appeared. In fact, it's entirely possible to group many devices with similar screen widths together and to end up with five distinct device screen width groupings:

  1. tiny: 84, 96, 101, 128, 130, 132
  2. small: 160, 176
  3. medium: 208, 220, 240
  4. large: 320, 360, 480+
  5. desktop: 800+

These groupings are of course, entirely arbitrary and your project's requirements may dictate a different set entirely. For example; 320 pixels for the iphone and above, 240 pixels for more recent mobile browsers, and 128 pixels for older devices. In the end, defining device groupings really comes down to the goals and audience of the project. To this end, it's a good idea to visit DeviceAtlas on a regular basis in order to survey the device property landscape and reassess the relevance of your groupings.

You may also find that the development team will choose to create their own groupings based primarily on device capabilities. These are often described in a class based system where technical features (or limitations) are graded into categories that enable developers to only deliver a given functionality to devices that are capable of supporting it. For instance a 'Class A' device might be capable of supporting an advanced CSS spec, DOM manipulation and Javascript—while a 'Class C' device might only be capable of rendering basic XHTML-MP and rudimentary CSS. Be sure to consult regularly with the developers on a project to ensure that your assumptions and device groupings are compatible with theirs.

Strategy 2: Create a default reference design

After you've defined your device groups (and consulted with your developers) you're probably in a good position to select your reference device. This is the device that will serve as default during the design process and will ultimately lead to the creation of a reference design. Depending upon your business requirements you may wish to design reference versions for a medium (240px) screen size. This keeps the design simple enough to adapt to smaller screens, while allowing for a little more creative freedom on devices with larger displays. It's also not uncommon to choose more than one reference device and consequently, create more than one reference design (often based in some way on the device groupings described earlier.) This allows you to:

  • progressively enhance the design for more advanced devices (ex: to take advantage of GPS, an accelerometer or CSS3 support),
  • deal gracefully with devices that support differing models of manipulation (ex: touch devices), or
  • adjust the design to compensate for severe limitations present on more restricted devices.

A reference design is necessary to serve as a basis for adaptations to other devices.

Strategy 3: Define rules for content and design adaptation

Once you've completed a reference design you should also provide specific direction for adaptation of this design to other screen sizes. Similar to the contents of a visual design document, these rules and guidelines should assist the development team in actually implementing the design in code. For example;

  • The site logo should be replaced (or adapted) for each device grouping to ensure image clarity.
  • Headers should stretch to 100% of the screen width using the supplied background image where possible.
  • Content images should be no larger than 200px wide for the 'default grouping' (or 80% of the device's screen width).
  • Content images should be automatically scaled and optimized to screen width if an alternate does not exit.
  • List icons are not to be used on displays smaller than the 'default grouping' in order to make as much space available for the actual content.
  • A dynamic style sheet is to be used in order to set many values on-the-fly for each device, and cached appropriately.

While not a formal recommendation, the above outlines common strategies to adapt and enhance design while keeping file sizes to a minimum. Always make design decisions based on the unique audience, goals (and challenges) of your project.

Define rules to indicate how a component of your design is intended to be adapted.

Strategy 4: Opt for web standards and a flexible layout

With the reference design and adaptation rules in place, the final strategy builds flexibility into the markup itself through the use of generic, standards based XHTML and CSS. In practice, this means creating markup that uses the tags and structures inherent in HTML (i.e. headers, paragraphs, lists and divs) to define the structure of your page. The immediate benefit—any browser that can read HTML will be able to display your content and will assign it an (albeit rudimentary) visual style. Given the vast number of mobile devices, this benefit cannot be underestimated as it ensures your content will be accessible to a large number of users without too much higgery-jiggery on the part of developers. You will then be in a great position to progressively enhance the design for different device groupings through the use of browser and/or device-specific CSS, graphics and scripting.

As described in the previous section, the content and design adaptations you choose to implement will vary depending on the project. Actual page width however, is one aspect that will typically not require formal adaptation. The issue of fixed versus fluid (or flexible) width designs has long been a topic for debate with web designers. The arguments tend to revolve around optimal text line lengths, wanting (or not wanting) the browser to fill the entire screen, and rendering issues related to large window width variances.

With the mobile web, these concerns don't weight in nearly as heavily. Line lengths are often too short regardless, there simply isn't enough screen real estate to have more than one useable browser window open at a time, and there isn't likely to be the extreme changes in width that might be possible with a desktop browser window. In fact, fluid designs lend themselves really well to mobile devices as they work beautifully with low-bandwidth design techniques that maximize the use of CSS and XHTML. These include:

  • Not specifying a specific document width, thereby enabling the design to expand and contract naturally to fill the screen.
  • Taking advantage of block elements which will also natively expand and contract.
  • Using CSS background colours and tiled images to style layout and content elements.
  • Specifying the size of layout elements using percentages so that they naturally expand and contract to fit page width.

Putting it all together

The following example from bbc.co.uk shows many of the design and adaptation strategies we have discussed in action. Let's first look at the XHTML markup.

<h1><img src="/mobile/images/hp-colours/tiles_greenblue.gif" width="75" height="34" alt="" border="0" /></h1>
  <!-- Editorial promo -->
  <h2>Featured</h2>
  <div id="topPromo"><img src="20081201180906.musicnews_mobile.jpg" width="170" height="96" alt="" border="0" />
  <p>Latest episode: La Roux, Kasabian and Jack Penate</p></div>
 
  <!-- News feed promo -->
  <h2>BBC News</h2>
  <div><img src="http://news.bbc.co.uk/media/images/45348000/jpg/_45348804_tank_getty226x260.jpg" width="66" height="49" alt="" border="0" />
  <p>Israel 'expands' Gaza offensive</p>
  </div>
 
  <!-- end News feed promo -->
 <div>
  <ul class="linkList">
  <li class="linkText">European gas supplies disrupted</li>
  <li class="linkText">Warnings issued amid Arctic chill</li>
  <li class="listMore">More top stories</li>
  </ul>
  </div>

The BBC markup is simple, standards compliant and relies on standard XHTML tags to define the structure of the content. This ensures that the basic content (consisting in this case of several headers, body copy, images and an unordered list) will be rendered—regardless of the device or browser. CSS is then used to style the content.

h1 { 
padding: 3px;
background: url(/mobile/images/hp-colours/banner-bak_greenblue.gif);
background-repeat: repeat-x;
background-color: #00594d;
color: white;          font-weight: bold;
font-size: small;
}
 
 
h2 {
color: #027063;
font-weight: normal;
font-size: medium;
padding: 2px;
background: url(/mobile/images/newimgs/h2-bak.gif);
background-repeat: repeat-x;
background-color: #ecedee;
border-bottom: 1px solid #c1c0c0;
}
 
 
h2 a:link, h2 a:visited {color: #027063;
font-weight: bold;
text-decoration: none;
}
 
 
h2 a:hover, h2 a:active {
color: #333333;
text-decoration: underline;
}
 
<;/pre>;
  <;pre id="line">;/* New promos */
#topPromo {
background-color: #000000;
}
 
 
#topPromo p {
color: white;
font-size: small;
border-top: 1px solid #757474;
padding: 2px;
}
 
 
#topPromo a:link, #topPromo a:visited {
color: white;
font-size: small;
display: block;
text-decoration: none;
}
 
 
#topPromo a:hover, #topPromo a:active {
color: #8ad3ca;
font-size: small;
display: block;
text-decoration: underline;
}
 
.linkList ul {
border-bottom: 1px solid #c1c0c0;
}
.linkList li {
padding: 2px;
padding-left: 19px;
margin: 2px;
}
.listTxt {
background: url(/mobile/images/newimgs/ico_txt_on-fff.gif);
background-repeat: no-repeat;
background-position: top left;
}

As you will note, the layout is entirely fluid. No set width is assigned to the page body, masthead, headers, lists or paragraphs. As seen in the example below, this results in a layout that performs much of the required adaptation on its own; simply scaling as needed to suit different screen widths.

The same fluid layout viewed within desktop and mobile versions of Safari.

The remaining styles and content are then specifically adapted server-side to suit the device or family of devices.

Illustration of adaptation points within a design.

  1. The logo is resized or replaced to suit the device screen width.
  2. The masthead uses both a tiled and coloured background. Older devices like the Nokia 6680 which feature less sophisticated browsers are unable to render the tiled background but do display the background colour. Even simpler devices supporting only WAP 2.0 (XHTML-MP) may ignore both style properties altogether and simply display the logo. (Note that in the BBC's case, this causes a problem as the white logo is then displayed on white; rendering it somewhat illegible).
  3. The BBC seems to have chosen to tailor the editorial to specific devices (or device groupings). While the iPhone includes a large 'Feature' item promoting music downloads, other devices jump striaght to the display of today's top 'BBC News'. This editorial decision may be due to the iPhone's flat data and strong podcast and media support but could also simply be due to its larger screen size. Were the 'Feature' displayed on a Nokia 6680 for example, it would take up most of the display forcing users to scroll to see today's top news stories. This decision is also counterbalanced by the reformatting of content further down. While all three news stories are displayed on the iPhone, only one includes a photograph. This once again enables all the top news content to be seen without scrolling.
  4. Images are scaled or replaced to suit the width of the display.
  5. On larger devices, icons are associated with each list item. While not visible in the example below, this stylistic element is removed on smaller devices ensuring a comfortable line length for the accompanying list copy.

A balanced approach

The BBC web site is an ideal example as it shows how simple it can be to combine clean markup with well conceived styles and strategic editorial decisions to achieve a great experience on a wide range of devices. Ultimately, your design, adaptation and editorial choices will be based on many factors including your budget, target audience and the functionality of the mobile web site you are designing. In the end, it's all about striking a balance between the creation of a well optimized, fast-loading site and the delivery of great, targeted content to your users.

For an in-depth look at the what makes a truly great mobile application and the design of mobile web sites from a user interface, functionality and usability point of view; be sure to read Mobile App Design: Getting to the Point Part I and Part II.


Filed under  //   UX   Usabilty   iphone   mobile  

5 Web Design Elements You Should Never Overlook | Website Usability

Website designing is tricky business. Often small things that go unnoticed turn out to be significant in impacting the overall performance of the website and further influencing crucial factors like website traffic, revenue generation and conversion figures.

Here are some factors that are often overlooked but are by no means unimportant and should be taken very seriously.

Mystery Meat Navigation

This is the type of navigation where icons or pictorial buttons are used to represented navigational links. Unlike regular navigation links, they are devoid of text that defines its location. Therefore users are left to wonder the location by themselves. This handicaps the browsing experience because users are often unable to locate the designated look.

Mystery meat navigation require JavaScript and images in order to function. This also bloats the size of web pages and increases their load time. This further hampers the accessibility quotient of the website. Even if you decide to use images for link, make sure you complement them requisite text links as well in order to make the navigation menu accessible and usable. Smooth and flawless browsing experience ensures rich user-experience.

Page Titles

Page titles are the texts that is displayed on the title bars of the web browser. It is the 'title' of the web page and should define the contents of the same. Many web designers make the mistake of writing the website name first followed by the page contents.

Ideally, the title of the content should precede the name of the website in the title bar. This is because Internet users and search engines are able to locate the contents of the website more easily.

Contact Information

Websites are your corporate face on the world wide web. And it is very important to establish your credibility. One of the ways you can ensure this is by letting your audiences know that there is a live presence behind the online presence and providing them a point to get in touch with them. Providing adequate contact information not only grants legitimacy to your online business but also helps your visitors to communicate with you.

Provide your business address, relevant phone numbers and a mailing address. If you are concerned about undue spam, provide a secure contact form on your website.

Site Map

One of the oft-forgotten but extremely important feature of a website. Many web designers forget to include a site map on their website. A site-map lists all the links of all the pages of a website according to the hierarchy and order. A site-map acts as a links page for search engine pages to crawl and also aid estranged users to locate their exact positions on the website and navigate to where they want to go.

Moreover, sitemaps also strengthen the internal linking of a website and provides a defined structure for the same.

Standardized Markup

In order to ensure the proper accessibility and usability of a website, it is very important to maintain a standardized mark-up. Be it using tables for layouts or the proper use of line breaks, just about everything counts for proper markup. Use semantic markup that ensures forward compatibility.



About the Author:

Kabir Bedi

Kabir Bedi works as a senior web consultant with LeXolution IT Services, an offshore web development outsourcing company in India. He has in-depth knowledge of the web industry and works with a team of Indian web designers to create visually appealing websites. In addition, he helps his company formulate effective web solutions and provide efficient web page design.

Filed under  //   UX   Usabilty   web strategy