Designer News
Where the design community meets.
9 years ago from Ronald Brummelkamp
This feels more like a crutch to me, and that we are making excuses for the real issue: websites (as they are now) don't work well on mobile-sized screens.
I don't think it's safe to put "websites" under one category. Yes, it's true that many websites are simple and could benefit from clearer navigation. I'm not a proponent of the hamburger. However, there are also websites which are incredibly complex, and should be. A lot of information on a very small screen, that's always going to be tough.
That's why I quantified websites with "as they used to be". I guess my argument is, when we reach for the crutch (the hamburger menu, complicated dropdown menus, etc.) then we are avoiding a larger architecture issue.
Compare uk.gov and apple.com. You can't tell me that apple.com is more complicated. Uk.gov just did a much better job of designing/architecting for mobile devices. Apple.com stuck with the status quo. I think that's largely because of marketing, but that's just a guess.
Designer News
Where the design community meets.
Designer News is a large, global community of people working or interested in design and technology.
Have feedback?
Apps and websites have to be thought of differently in this context. On iOS, the bottom navigation behaves like tabs: instantaneously switching between functional modes or views.
Websites like apple.com have a different purpose. They're informational, and have a broader and deeper hierarchy which requires correspondingly hierarchical navigation. Furthermore, websites are generally loaded inside the chrome of your mobile browser which takes care of certain navigational elements such as the back/forward buttons.
It gets tricky if your app is very hierarchical, or if your website is very tool-like, but the navigation pattern should be dictated by the intended user behavior, not just the size of screen.