Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 18.104.22.168
And Google shows no signs of working on a solution.
joined:June 3, 2007
joined:Apr 22, 2012
no responsive design here. fixed table layout rules with structured content.
I always opt for something that fits full screen so the visitor doesn't end up enlarging, scrolling, etc.
300x250 and they do better on the mobile site than on the desktop
no responsive design here. fixed table layout rules with structured content.This had been my attitude since the beginning, until this past year. With the mobile ad market growing so rapidly, I think we need to be more open to doing things differently. What matters most to me is ad revenue and I'm certainly not going to do anything that will hurt that. The only way to know if responsive design will increase ad revenue is to give it a try.
joined:Apr 22, 2012
@sgod how were you able to make the right sidebar go to the top of the main content div?
i wonder why no one is using the recommended and dedicated mobile banner 320x50? it fits best for mobile devices
you don't need "responsive design" for that. for example, fixed layouts will be autoresized upon loading with this code:
[edited by: martinibuster at 9:26 pm (utc) on Feb 5, 2013]
[edit reason] Fixed link. If it's useful & Non-Promo I'm ok with it. [/edit]
I've been down both paths and if you want it to look reasonable on much smaller formats you need responsive design. Fixed layouts that simply resize turn to muck real fast when the view port exceeds the design limitation while a responsive design nicely degrades to properly fit.
Is anyone else seeing better results from 320x50 compared to 300x250?
Responsive design is unlikely to produce a design and content which is best suited to mobiles
A separate mobile site takes time and effort but in the end that is what is really needed
it seems that the only thing that's completely acceptable is to switch the ads out in server-side code.