The .mobi Domain is a Big Mistake
The theory behind the .mobi domain is that your .com site is for “normal” browsers and your .mobi site is for “mobile” browsers. What a ridiculous notion.
Mobile devices are a ridiculously large landscape and far from a single device that you can somehow target. From mobile phones to pdas to that wireless ipod we’re all still waiting on, the screen sizes, resolutions and capabilities of these devices vary widely.
.mobi is a Betrayal of Web Standards
Having a .mobi domain betrays the idea of web standards. You should create one site, one application that targets web standards as it’s platform. That way that one site at yoursite.com will work on your mobile phone and your PC. Having a .mobi version of your site to target “mobile” browsers makes as much sense as having a .ie version of your site to target Internet Explorer or how about a .tablet version of your site to target tablet PCs or even better a .ori domain to target Microsoft’s new Origami device.
Bad Advice From a Smart Guy
Yahoo Russell Beattie wrote a disappointing post where he claimed .mobi is a good thing. Why? Because he can’t remember the location of the “mobile” version of sites he uses. Here’s a list of sites he gives as an example:
Yahoo!: http://wap.oa.yahoo.com
AOL: http://mobile.aol.com
MSN: http://mobile.msn.com
Google: http://google.com/xhtml
ESPN: http://proxy.espn.go.com/wireless/espn/
Weather Channel: http://xhtml.weather.com/xhtml/
BBC: http://www.bbc.co.uk/mobile
ABC News: http://wap.go.com/abcnews/
This is a problem, but it’s not a problem with the domain extension. It’s a problem with the site owners not creating a site that takes proper advantage of standards.
A Simple Solution
If the address for Yahoo is http://yahoo.com then the “mobile” version should be (drum-roll please) http://yahoo.com. It should also be the version for mobile PCs, that magic wireless ipod that’s around the corner, voice browsers for the blind and any and every browser in the future that cares to understand the standards that make up the web.
Approving .mobi as a top level domain is a big mistake and an even bigger money grab. Don’t waste your time buying one and certainly don’t waste your time designing a site specifically for a .mobi extension. Instead, invest a little time in making sure your site is standards compliant and then rest easy knowing that you’re not going to need a new domain name every time a new form factor hits the market.
Permanent Link
Agreed 100%.
My additional 2 cents is that sites should also be publishing APIs that allow developers for mobile gadgets (or anything else) to figure out what to do with data; sometimes even super standards-compliant XHTML markup isn’t the most useful format for information to be in, depending on what you want to do. (Think Amazon: can you really imagine trying to do anything on Amazon from a 1-inch screen?)
I agree with your notion of web standards, CG, but given the lameness of reality and its lack of standardization, this article sorta helps, I think:
http://webmonkey.com/webmonkey/04/12/index4a.html?tw=design
I agree with Ansel that even the best xhtml isn’t going to make Amazon useful on a 1 in screen, but for that matter, what is? I don’t believe Amazon could provide a useful service that would not completely overwhelm a mobile browser with sheer volume of information. I believe wholeheartedly that the answer is clean code and accessibility considerations. Make a site that’s accessible to a screen reader or text browser and you’ll be accessible to mobiles. It also removes the trouble of maintaining seperate sites with (nearly) identical content. As we’ve seen in the past, seperate is rarely, if ever, equal.
The idea behind .mobi is conformity to standards and accepting those standards. Using .mobi as a scapegoat for other bogus extensions like saying most networks (.net) fall under commercial entities (.com). To debate the point and further healthy discussion, I pose the following questions.
Do you have an internet capable device?
If no, I recommend you get one, then you might have a little more of an understanding of the issue, whether or not it comforms with Web Standards.
If yes, continue
When is the last time you took your mobile device and surfed without reaching a page that was not mobile-friendly?
Chances are, never. There’s not enough of them out there. By introuducing .mobi, there is a push for the publishing of mobile-friendly websites. I understand your point about “yahoo.com should be both the regular and mobile-friendly website”. In a perfect world, that would definitely be the case. I’m not asking you to be an early-adopter or even an early part of the early majority, but at least think about how this could affect mobile computing as a whole regardless in the end if .mobi sinks or floats.
I’ve carried both PDAs and mobile phones over the years with a web browser and currently carry an EVDO phone with a reasonable browser, so assuming ignorance on my part, choose your own adventure style, doesn’t exactly help your argument.
The problem isn’t with the domain extension. It’s the crappy markup behind it. Instead of developing a whole second version of your app for a ‘mobile’ which will vary widely in specs, why not fix the app you’ve already got. It’ll save you time, money and your users grief when they’re forced to guess if they should go to .com or .mobi.