Mobile vs Desktop version of the browser

[dwaynewilliams#WN]

I'm kind if torn between using the mobile version of the broker and the full desktop version of the browser. Coming from a BlackBerry smartphone, I have been acclimated to using the mobile versions of websites. But now that I have the EVO, I like the fact that I can view full web pages. The mobile sites are definitely faster. It takes just several seconds for them to load. Some of the full websites (depending on the content) can still take a while to load. I like not having to deal with the advertisements on the pages of full sites too, but I have to admit that the full sites look amazing on the EVO. When Froyo is released and we have full flash support, I wonder what version I will prefer. Which version of the browser do you guys prefer?

 

[noshooz]

I'm used to full web sites. If I have a browser that will display a full site properly, that's how I want it displayed.

 

[ldudiaz]

Full browser for me as well

 

[ArkAngel06]

Full

 

[Jerzyiroc]

Full. Always hated mobile version

 

[PM-Performance]

I do full because I had problems loading certain sites in mobile view.
Once put to full, they load as they should.

Wont see this happen too often i assume, but Ive seen it with a few sites. Mostly financial and https sites

 

[noshooz]

news.cnet.com defaults to a mobile version.
I get around it by going to "Full CNET site" link at the bottom, then tapping on the News link at the top of the page.

I do full because I had problems loading certain sites in mobile view.
Once put to full, they load as they should.

Wont see this happen too often i assume, but Ive seen it with a few sites. Mostly financial and https sites

 

[Darth Mo]

I use the Desktop Agent in the browser, but I don't mind the mobile version of some pages.

If I'm looking up sports scores, the mobile version is a lot faster because there are fewer links to follow and less zooming. Nice when checking a quick score while at work. But in general, most sites I visit on my phone lose a little to much when going down to the mobile version.

It also helps that with the Evo, you can navigate most full sites without zooming at all. That may be troublesome for those that have failing vision, but for the person with average to slightly above average vision it's fine. As for ads, I don't really notice them these days. The ones that make you watch a 15 s commercial before you can continue are annoying, so are the ones that are placed in the middle of an article. But, I much prefer that over having to pay a few dollars each month to access some content at all.

 

[theiphonewannabe]

I have been testing out Opera recently and I have found it to load full pages much faster. The only mobile pages I like are sports pages like ESPN and SI.

Still using Dolphin as my primary browser, but Opera might quickly replace it.

 

[Holsum]

I like to use the full because most sites did a half ass job putting together thier mobile sites.

 

[dwaynewilliams#WN]

I can't get the New York Times in full desktop mode. Anyone else have this issue?

 

[MAD WIL]

I can't get the New York Times in full desktop mode. Anyone else have this issue?

...Adultswim.com loads the mobile site in portrait view & full site in landscape view . I don't know why, but that's what it does...

 

[js2393]

Full. Most of the sites that I'd actually prefer to view a Mobile version of have apps available (Facebook, YouTube, etc.)

 

[SilverZero]

...Adultswim.com loads the mobile site in portrait view & full site in landscape view . I don't know why, but that's what it does...

Seriously, what's up with that?

I also prefer full in most cases. If the mobile site is well-written, I usually don't mind it (Wikipedia pages come to mind, also The Onion if you visit every day). But in general, I like the full page that I can zoom in on and scroll myself. The way the Evo automatically wraps text to fit the screen zoom is fantastic for just this reason.

 

[dwaynewilliams#WN]

Some of the mobile pages have more functionality. For example, when I use the Google search to find a place, the mobile version automatically hives you the option to map it using Google maps. The full version gives you the option to get directions but they are written out instead of using Google map that leads to the navigation system.

 

[dwaynewilliams#WN]

Now that I have full flash support and had a chance to see what the full sites have to offer, I still prefer mobile sites. Better functionality.

 

[NicksGarage]

I use mobile sites for banking and checking into flights and such but sometimes I switch to the full ones for other things. A well-designed mobile site is nice for getting to things quickly, no zooming, easier to click on links.

 

[SdotJ]

I do a good mix of both. Most full sites I Ho to take longer to load and the pop up adds flash brought along can be annoying to deal with so I stick to mobile sites for forums.

 

[dwaynewilliams#WN]

I do a good mix of both. Most full sites I Ho to take longer to load and the pop up adds flash brought along can be annoying to deal with so I stick to mobile sites for forums.

I agree with that. It takes maybe 3 to 5 seconds to load a mobile page where I have found that It sometimes can take up to 40+ seconds to load some full sites. Even though that is still way better than my blackberry, I think it is top long for on the go browsing. I use the mobile mode now and it makes a lit more sense. No zooming, or searching the page for content. And the advertising is minimal. Also, I have found that the mobile sites have increased functionality. Especially on the Google mobile site. It is a lot more intuitive.

 

[mr.seth.price]

I like to use the full because most sites did a half *** job putting together thier mobile sites.

agree wholeheartedly.