Hacker News Reader

I fucking hate the term "responsive design" because in reality nothing is "responsive". A shitty fixed 980px site will still look like crap on 1080p 24'' monitor.

Calling it responsive just because the navigation menu is moved above the content when viewing it from the phone doesn't make it "responsive".

View on HN

You know what's really responsive? Proportional width, aka the default.

HN is great and usable on my 27" desktop monitor or my 4" phone screen. Less design is more.

If you call "having to zoom in to make the text even readable" great and usable, then yes, HN is "responsive".

>You know what's really responsive? Proportional width, aka the default.

Yes.

>HN is great and usable

No. HN is not the default, it uses both pixel and point dimensions, and makes unreasonable assumptions about them. If HN used ems or exs then it would be usable.

Not if you use media queries that look for resolution and pixel density to make appropriate adjustments. It all comes down to the implementation. Your example is a generalisation sir. I can give you plenty of fine examples of responsive web design where it's more than "moving a menu". It's all in the implementation and the implementer.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com