There is no fold
thereisnofold.tumblr.com
thereisnofold.tumblr.com
I think the x-axis is pixels, where 0 is the top of the viewable part of the browser, and increases downward, but it took me a long time to figure that out. (My initial guess was milliseconds into a page view, but that makes no sense since I assume the y-axis on the second graph is seconds into engagement.)
This is one of many digital design that are inspired by terms from print, like "page" (which also is inappropriate for digital if you take the print meaning literally.)
And, anyway, laptop users do fold their computers in half, but that's a completely different thing.
Does it? I suppose it could mean "outside the first screen", as in on the next "card" in a mobile "slide deck", or "below the scroll" in a browser (that is: content that is on the virtual page, but outside the viewport).
But my impression is that people are not using it like that -- in which case "the fold" is probably a poor/wrong metaphor/term?
> This is one of many digital design that are inspired by terms from print, like "page" (which also is inappropriate for digital if you take the print meaning literally.)
Not really. In (magazine/newspaper) print, a page typically holds various assorted content. Especially so for the front page. Now, with scrolling, "page" will often mean "all of a document at a given URL" -- and that would typically be different from a print page. In that case "viewport" would be more appropriate. But I think the confusion really lies in the print world: "page" means both "what the user can see at any one time" (viewport) and "largest section of connected layout" (the physical page).
> And, anyway, laptop users do fold their computers in half, but that's a completely different thing.
But mobile users did, at least for a while. There were/are some phones with a small screen on the back of the "flip". AFAIK all of these only have enough real-estate for a small icon and simple scrolling text message though. And aren't really meant for showing a preview of some random web page, but rather to alert the user to incomming email etc.
Not that that means much.
So that part of the comment wasn't just a rhetorical question. Are there any well-known, more canonical definitions of "the fold" as used in web design? Does it make sense in the current climate of wildly varying designs for desktop and mobile?
If you're talking about an info box with a CTA in it, maybe it doesn't need to be near the top of the page or viewable on initial load.
But if you're a service based company, and you're talking about a support link, having it anywhere other than prominently displayed immediately on page load is going to aggravate your customers. In that case there is definitely "a fold."
The fact that there's 4k different devices viewing your page doesn't change the fact that their browser window has a bottom, it just means that the location of that bottom is volatile. If you really care, your page design can be responsive to not just the width of the browser window but the height as well.
Abusing the concept of a fold is lazy and ignorant. It shouldn't be treated like the only aspect of web browsing that matters. But at the same time, ignoring the fact that some of your content will be immediately viewable to users upon loading the page and other content won't, is also lazy and ignorant.
Just Wordpress? I think you're describing every web site designed since 2008 there.
I highly doubt we'd see the same breakdown for new users vs. return users. IE, return-users know they can scroll, new-users don't have that knowledge.
Saying something like "There is no fold" is not going to help students recognize the issue.
So I always find it a bit amusing to hear people talk in the Web context about "above the fold." Oh, that goes above the fold? OK, which one?