I know I'm a bit late on the boat with this, but this is my first proper attempt at a responsive layout. I thought I'd try it out on my own site first, in case it went wrong! Rather happy with the results. Check it out on ogvidius.com.
Thanks guys! And that's good to hear Jack. I don't have an iPad to check it on but that's good to hear. Does it go down to the one column layout, or still use the one with a sidebar?
Any thought behind adding an option for a viewport smaller than 460px wide? The iPhone 3G/S (in vertical orientation) has a viewport that is 320px wide.
Welcome to the responsive web, Jonathan! I use a 16 column layout on most of our responsive sites, and these are our sizes:
16 column = 960px : great for desktop
12 column = 720px : great for iPad in portrait
10 column = 600px : great for Kindle Fire, Galaxy Tab 7", Playbook, and Nook Tablet in portrait
8 column = 480px : great for iPhone in landscape
5 column or 100% : great for anything less than 480px (smartphones)
Thanks everyone! And Steven, I considered that. But I decided against it. I think the aim of responsive design is more that the content fits the device rather than it looking cool when you resize the browser. Personally I hardly ever resize the browser so much people shouldn't even notice that it's a responsive site. And I think that's the way it should be.
14 Responses
Pro
Jonathan Ogden
I know I'm a bit late on the boat with this, but this is my first proper attempt at a responsive layout. I thought I'd try it out on my own site first, in case it went wrong! Rather happy with the results. Check it out on ogvidius.com.
Any feedback is welcome!
3 months ago
Pro
Jason Krieger
Not late at all really, nice work on the responsive layout. Works well.
3 months ago
Pro
Jack Bingham
Looks stunning on iPad! Really nice work.
3 months ago
Pro
Jonathan Ogden
Thanks guys! And that's good to hear Jack. I don't have an iPad to check it on but that's good to hear. Does it go down to the one column layout, or still use the one with a sidebar?
3 months ago
Pro
Joshua Krohn
Lovin' it dude!
Any thought behind adding an option for a viewport smaller than 460px wide? The iPhone 3G/S (in vertical orientation) has a viewport that is 320px wide.
3 months ago
Pro
Jonathan Ogden
Thanks Joshua! I wasn't sure on which widths to use. It sounds like there's some tweaking to be done!
3 months ago
Pro
Joshua Krohn
If you're on Firefox or Chrome, here's a handy extension to "preview" your site in different resolutions: http://chrispederick.com/work/web-developer/
3 months ago
Pro
Michael Ellis
Looks awesome man!
3 months ago
Pro
Steven Grant
nice one, only suggestion is to use some CSS transitions between the viewport shift to ease the change
3 months ago
Welcome to the responsive web, Jonathan! I use a 16 column layout on most of our responsive sites, and these are our sizes:
16 column = 960px : great for desktop
12 column = 720px : great for iPad in portrait
10 column = 600px : great for Kindle Fire, Galaxy Tab 7", Playbook, and Nook Tablet in portrait
8 column = 480px : great for iPhone in landscape
5 column or 100% : great for anything less than 480px (smartphones)
3 months ago
Pro
Jonathan Ogden
Thanks everyone! And Steven, I considered that. But I decided against it. I think the aim of responsive design is more that the content fits the device rather than it looking cool when you resize the browser. Personally I hardly ever resize the browser so much people shouldn't even notice that it's a responsive site. And I think that's the way it should be.
Thanks for the sizes James!
3 months ago
Pro
Richard Tabor
Crazy nice! Sexy in fact.
3 months ago
Pro
Sascha M. Trinkaus
Very nice work Jonathan!
about 1 month ago
Totally awesome. Nice work!
10 days ago