What’s in my bag?

Sounds like a dare to me. How can I resist?


First, the bag itself. I love Tom Bihn bags. In addition to this backpack and its clip-in accessory pouches, I own two messenger bags and an assortment of other pouches. They are super high-quality and supremely functional. As you’ll see when I show you how much stuff I can cram into this bag and still have plenty of room to spare!

Let’s look at the contents of the red pouch. That’s where I keep adapters and thumb drives.


Oh, and an iPod nano, for some reason.

I need napkins (and/or paper towels) a lot. I can’t stand having a runny nose, or spilling things. Whatever the reason, I carry a few around with me all the time. I know it’s probably not the best for the environment, but I do buy recycled as much as possible. Anyway, that’s what the black pouch is for. And the large black thing is a padded sleeve perfectly sized for the 11-inch MacBook Air.


Next up, another bag-within-a-bag. This is the one non-Tom Bihn case I use. It’s a Roocase for the iPad mini. The iPad mini actually just barely fits in it, which is fine. I take my iPad mini with me to meetings, especially first-time meetings with new clients, because it doesn’t create a wall like having a laptop on the desk does. I have also stopped carrying my laptop when I travel for pleasure, so the iPad in the Roocase is all I bring. In addition to protecting the iPad, the Roocase has a side pocket into which I manage to shove a Field Notes notebook, Space Pen, headphones and some business cards.


And finally… everything else. This is the entirety of what I had in my backpack when I came to work this morning, aside from some running clothes I had also shoved in but don’t really feel I need to show here.


Look at all that stuff! From top left to bottom right, we have:

  • Two copies of my latest CD
  • Victorinox Swiss Army Cybertool S, which is too big to actually carry in my pocket but an essential tool for tech geeks
  • Another Field Notes notebook
  • Sharpie, Field Notes pen, Space Pen
  • Compact travel power strip (highly recommended)
  • More business cards
  • 1/8″ to 1/4″ headphone adapter (not sure why that’s in there)
  • Novelty fan that plugs into iPhone Lightning port
  • Postage stamps
  • iPhone/iPad charger
  • MacBook Air charger
  • $3.01 in change
  • A bunch of Ricola cough drops (original flavor)
  • Spare keys on a special strap that Tom Bihn also makes
  • Anker portable phone charger, its charging cable, a USB-to-Lightning cable, and carrying pouch
  • Roocase with iPad mini and all of that crap inside it
  • 11-inch MacBook Air with padded sleeve
  • Accessory pouch with napkins
  • Accessory pouch with adapters, thumb drives and iPod nano

P.S. Sorry for the quality of the photos… I hastily snapped these on the studio conference table under harsh fluorescent lighting.

Can a developer use an iPad as their only portable “computer”?

I am at a crossroads in my work situation. Since 2008 I have worked as a freelance web developer, which naturally meant using a laptop as my primary/only computer. I worked mostly from home, but I would frequently go to coffeehouses, and occasionally work on-site at client offices. A portable computer was a must.

The same week that Steve Jobs announced the 11-inch MacBook Air, I went out and purchased one. It was exactly what I wanted: a full-blown Mac, (almost) as small as an iPad (which of course I already owned as well, but mainly used for testing, occasional gaming, and watching all six seasons of Lost in the span of a month on Netflix, not for “real work”). I loved the MacBook Air. I said it was the best Mac I’d ever owned, though I admitted it was a tad underpowered. Enough so that when SLP needed a new computer 6 months later, I gave her my MacBook Air instead and bought myself a new, slightly more powerful version of the same.

That MacBook Air has been my only computer ever since. In fact, shortly after switching to it full-time, I wrote a glowing review of it right here. But last April I moved my business into a storefront studio space. I’m not going to coffeehouses anymore. Now, more often than not, clients come to me instead of the other way around. And all of this time I’ve been sitting at a desk, with that same 11-inch MacBook Air hooked up to an HP 23-inch LCD. (Yes, HP. I may be a self-proclaimed Apple fanboy, but even I can’t justify the expense of one of their Cinema Display monitors.)

It’s in this context that I’ve finally really become aware of the performance limitations of the 2010 MacBook Air. It’s unbearably slow with Adobe Creative Suite apps. It’s even unbearably slow running Panic’s Coda. And no computer today should choke up on what is essentially a glorified text editor. (That said… As much as I love Coda, it does seem bloated and slow almost everywhere I’ve used it. There’s no comparison to the blazing speed of BBEdit, which I also love, but Coda has some features I prefer, so it remains my main coding tool.)

Over the past few months, as my workload has increased and my patience has diminished, I can no longer pretend that the 2010 MacBook Air’s performance is adequate for my needs. I know the 2012 Airs are at least 3 times faster than the one I have, and I’m sure this year’s will be even faster, and maybe even have a Retina display, and therein lies the problem: I’ve been desperately wanting to upgrade my Mac, but I couldn’t bring myself to buy one of the current 11-inch Airs (the only portable I will consider) when they’re getting so close to a refresh.

At the same time, I have a major crunch at work over the next 3 months. I couldn’t afford to wait on my creaky old Air anymore. So last weekend I settled on a compromise, borne of the fact that I almost never touch my MacBook Air outside of the studio anymore. I got a Mac mini for the studio. I went with the more powerful quad-core i7 model, which is rated on Geekbench as at least 6 times faster than my old MacBook Air, and almost twice as fast as the current ones.

I’ve already noticed a huge difference. Adobe Creative Suite is way faster, almost to the point of no longer being infuriating. (But that’s another story.) Coda is still occasionally sluggish, but that may have more to do with the fact that I’m working with files on our local file server over a questionable WiFi connection. I should try putting the files directly on my hard drive to see if it makes a difference.

But now I am faced with a weird dilemma. This is the first desktop computer I’ve owned since the Dell I had back in 2001, and the first Mac desktop since even before that. (It was a Bondi blue G3 tower, if you were wondering.) The dilemma is this: in a world of iPads, where I am already pretty much never touching my MacBook Air outside of work, do I really need a portable Mac at all?

I still have the Air, of course, and have continued to lug it around next to my iPad in my Tom Bihn bag this week. But why? In the two meetings I had this week at client offices, I only used my iPad. Maybe the iPad is really all I need. Maybe?

I have a few months to find out. I won’t consider buying another MacBook Air until the new models are out, so in the meantime I will experiment. I will try only using the iPad for any and all computing tasks outside of the studio. I’ve begun that today, by typing this blog post on it as I sit at the kitchen counter with my Saturday morning coffee. It’s been a bit of a challenge. I gave up on using the WordPress web interface and switched to the (marginally better) dedicated iPad app. And I’ve made lots of typos… some that iOS auto-corrected, some it didn’t, and some false positives it shouldn’t have. (C’mon, iPad… use some context, would ya? Why would anyone ever write “you we’re”?)

The biggest challenge will be if I have to write some actual code. But it’s a far different world for that than it was even a year ago. I have a handful of coding apps on my iPad, though nothing I have could be more valuable than another pair of apps from Panic: Diet Coda (great name, BTW) and Prompt, a terminal app. I haven’t had much call to use either of them… yet. But I’ve been comforted knowing they’re there.

At the end of this month we’re planning a family vacation to Utah. That may prove to be the ultimate test. Do I dare leave for a week with only my iPad? Honestly, I’m not sure I can. It will depend on the state of my various work projects at that time. But I’d like to be able to give it a try.

I’ll post follow-ups here as the experiment continues.

Defense Against the Dark Arts (of iMessage Configuration)

Ever since upgrading to iOS 6, I’ve had a problem. The glorious promise of iMessage with its seamless integration of SMS/MMS and Apple’s messaging services between iPad, iPhone and Mac has mostly worked, with one infuriating, deal-breaking exception.

Texts to my phone number go to my iPad and not to my iPhone.

Look, all of this integrated messaging is cool. Being able to have text messages show up not only on my phone but on my other devices is awesome. But they have to at least show up on my phone or the whole thing is a failure.

I’ve researched the problem and found some people with somewhat similar issues, lots of stuff involving jailbroken iPhones (which mine is not), etc. but no clear answers to my exact problem. Several people in forums suggested shutting off iMessage on the various devices, deleting accounts, full-blown factory restore, you name it. All of which were either things I tried and found didn’t work, or wasn’t willing to try due to the amount of time and tedious work involved.

iMessage SettingsSo I began experimenting. There was one distinct problem I could see in settings. On both iOS devices and my Mac, the Messages app was showing both my phone number and email address. But in some cases one was grayed out. Infuriatingly, on my iPad and Mac, the phone number was grayed out and checked, and on the iPhone the phone number was grayed out and not checked. I could easily add or remove the connection of my email address to any of the devices, but my phone number was stubbornly locked into my iPad only. (Or, well, my iPad and my Mac… I guess. Honestly I hardly ever use Messages on my Mac so I haven’t really paid attention.)

I wish I could give a clear account of what came next, but I started tapping various buttons and clicking various boxes with such a fury that it all became a blur. What I do remember is that I clicked the checkbox next to my email on my Mac, which un-grayed the phone number. I was then able to uncheck the phone number, and the email now became grayed out.

So, if I understand correctly, the way iMessage settings work, at least one receiving phone number/email address must be checked at all times, so if only one is checked, it’s also grayed out so you can’t uncheck it. Then, if you check the other one, you may be able to uncheck the first.

That wasn’t working on my iPhone, however. Strangely though (at least as I recall from the aforementioned blur), when I repeated the process from my Mac on my iPad, then took a look at my phone, it was already switched to having the phone number checked and grayed out.

So then I began running some tests. This is where things get muddy, and since all of this just happened a few minutes ago, I still may not have a complete solution. I tried sending a text to my phone number from SLP’s iPhone. Never got it. Then I tried sending a text to my phone number from my iPad and it went to my phone within seconds. Cool. Then I tried sending a text to my email address from SLP’s iPhone, and it immediately showed up on all three of my devices.

Everything then is working as expected except that I did not get the text from SLP’s iPhone to my phone number at all, on any device. It’s hard to say what that’s all about. Are things working now? I don’t know.

Here’s another weird thing to throw into the mix. SLP and I share an iTunes Store account, but we have separate iCloud accounts. I also have a separate iCloud account apart from the iTunes Store account. The iTunes Store account uses my “real” email address, and I have a separate me.com email address I use on iCloud. So that’s all kind of a big mess, yes I know. Anyway, whenever I made these various changes to my configurations, the iOS devices would pop up alerts regarding the change. These alerts also appeared on SLP’s iPhone, even though her Messages settings don’t have any of my account info associated with them.

The bottom line here, for me, is that Apple really has not dealt with the reality of multiple users on the same device, multiple family members sharing an iTunes Store account but needing their own iCloud accounts, etc. They may be trying to deal with it all, but they’re trying to integrate too many things that had developed for too long as independent products. And they’re not having as much success at it as they think they are.

This post began as many others here do, as an attempt to share my solution to an Apple conundrum. Unfortunately in this case I just can’t quite make sense of what’s happening, and it seems to be one of those dark-clouds-on-the-horizon portents of more trouble to come with Apple’s tendency for its ambitions to exceed its capabilities in the realm of networked services.

I just want it to work. Isn’t that the Apple promise?

Follow up: Just after posting this I had our neighbor — who also has an iPhone but of course does not share our iTunes/iCloud accounts — send a text to my phone number, and I got it. So the problem seems mostly resolved. But let’s leave it at this: if you share your iTunes Store account with another family member and you both have iPhones, you might need to send your text to each other’s email addresses instead of phone numbers, if you’re running into the same problems I’ve been having.

Responsive Web Design: A Practical Approach (Part One… Again)

With exactly three posts here all summer, the last being nearly two months ago, it might be reasonable to assume this blog had been abandoned. Wrong! I have simply been so busy, building so many responsive websites, that I haven’t had time to gather my thoughts to share in anything longer than 140-character bursts.

“‘Responsive’ websites?” you say, and I hear the internal quotation marks in your voice. Yes. If you don’t know what responsive web design is… well, let’s be honest. You found this post, if you found it at all, when you googled “responsive web design” so I suspect you have at least a passing familiarity with the term. So let’s get started.

(Actually, before we get started, a quick note: astute observers may… um… observe that I wrote a seemingly identical post to this one back in June. And yes, that’s right. But after a summer immersed in this stuff, rather than continuing from there with “part two” it felt better to start over from the beginning with a more in-depth introduction.)

Getting Started, or, rather: How I Got Started

I’ve owned an iPhone for about 4 1/2 years now, and one of the first things I noticed shortly after it became the hottest thing around was that everyone was suddenly creating mobile websites. There were even services created just to help you convert your website into a mobile website. But it was always a separate experience (usually with a domain name that started with m.) and invariably an inferior one.

A lot of websites still do that, and it still sucks. It’s two separate websites, which is bad for users — often content doesn’t make it to the mobile site, and when that happens there’s no easy way to get to it on the desktop version — and it’s bad for site owners — double (or more) the work.

But about a year ago I started to notice a new approach, one that didn’t require two separate websites, and one that, owing partly to how quickly it caught on with the superstars of web design, usually yielded much better looking results: responsive web design (which I will henceforth lazily refer to as RWD). RWD uses CSS3 media queries to detect the window/screen size the page is displayed on, and changes the layout of the page to suit the screen. On the fly. Same page. Same CSS.

So there is no mobile site, no desktop site. There’s just the site. And it looks great on any screen.

In theory.

Of course, this solution is not perfect. But it is better in so many ways — standards compliant, future-proof, user-friendly, easy to maintain — that it is clearly the optimal solution for mobile websites today.

Getting Started (you, this time)

Before you delve into RWD, there are a couple of things you need to know: 1) HTML5 and 2) CSS3. More specifically, you need to embrace the concept of semantic HTML fully, as a well-structured HTML document is essential to the responsive approach.

I assume if you’re thinking about RWD, you’ve long since abandoned table-based layouts, and you probably don’t even remember the <font> tag existed, right? Right. But for RWD to work well you need full separation of your visual design from your document structure.

My personal preference is to take this to an extreme: I never even use <img> tags except in body content. All visual elements of the layout are contained in my CSS, even logos, and I avoid using images wherever possible. By taking full advantage of the visual effects offered by CSS3, and accepting “graceful degradation” in older browsers (or, in reverse, “progressive enhancement” in newer ones) — a topic we’ll get to in a bit — you can create a lean, well-structured site that is ripe for the responsive treatment.

Building Blocks

Nothing starts from nothing. (Whoa, that’s heavy.) And certainly a responsive website doesn’t (or generally shouldn’t) start from scratch. There are three building blocks that I now include in every site I build out:


Created by CSS guru Eric Meyer, reset.css is a handy little file that removes all styling, which can vary between browsers, from all HTML elements, allowing you to “reset” the design and start with a clean slate. Just remember that it means you’re going to have to redefine everything — I guarantee your CSS file will eventually contain strong { font-weight: bold; } and em { font-style: italic; } but that’s the price you pay for complete control.


Developed (or at least maintained and expanded upon) by Remy Sharp, the purpose of html5shiv.js is to enable support for new HTML5 elements in older, but still widely used, non-HTML5 browsers like Internet Explorer 8 and earlier. You don’t have to use the new tags like <article> and <nav> to do RWD, but it’s fun, and feels like the future.


There are a handful of popular JavaScript libraries out there whose goals are generally to 1) standardize inconsistent JavaScript across browsers, and 2) make working with the DOM easier, so you can do cool, standards-compliant, cross-browser compatible animations and interactivity with just a line or two of code. jQuery is arguably the most popular of these, and is my personal favorite. Again, this is not strictly required for RWD, but I use it all the time, and often in ways that enhance the capabilities of my responsive layouts. (One specific example: it’s great as a foundation for resizing complex elements like slideshows… of course, for that matter, it’s great for making the slideshows in the first place.)

Finding Your Break(ing) Point(s)

The grand vision of pure RWD is a fully fluid layout that scales dynamically to any screen size, and a grand vision it is indeed. But we are living in an imperfect world, with many factors to consider.

In my case, I typically work with outside designers. Designers who appreciate and support RWD but are not immersed in its intricacies like I am. And I don’t want them to have to be. So as a hybrid developer-designer, I make use of my somewhat unusual but not especially unique skill set to handle the responsive adaptations for them. They just deliver a “regular” web design to me, I build that out, and then I adapt and scale and shift things around as needed for the smaller screen sizes, doing my best to stay true to the spirit of the original design.

There are two keys to making this approach work:

  1. Get the designs in Illustrator format, not Photoshop. (No, seriously. You’ll find out why in a bit.)
  2. Be prepared to start thinking about break points and accept that a perfectly fluid layout is not in your immediate future.

To understand break points, you need to understand common screen dimensions. You also need to understand the importance of margins to an aesthetically pleasing layout.

For years the target screen size for web design has been 1024×768 which, delightfully, is also the effective resolution of the iPad. (Yes, the newer iPads have a high-resolution “Retina Display” which is 2048×1536, but CSS pixel measurements are “pixel-doubled” on these displays, so you don’t really need to think about high-res too much, except when it comes to images, and we’ll discuss that in a minute.)

So, we can (still) start with 1024×768. But that doesn’t mean your design should be 1024 pixels wide. You need margins, both for stuff like window “chrome” (borders, scrollbars, etc.) and also just to give your content a little breathing room. A commonly accepted standard width to use for web designs is 960 pixels, and I still stick with that.

This can sometimes cause some confusion for designers who are used to the fixed palette of a printed page. Your content can/should go all the way to the edges of that 960-pixel layout, and you still need to think about what comes outside of that area. So it’s good when you’re designing to think of foreground and background. Have an arbitrarily huge background canvas, with a 960-pixel-wide by whatever-pixel-tall box floating top-center over it, where your foreground content will go.

But I digress. We start with 960. That’s our maximum break point. (OK, if your audience is primarily looking at the site on 30-inch displays, you might want to consider an additional larger break point at 1200 or so.) Then we move down from there. I like to think of it like this:

Device/Screen Type Screen Width Content Width #wrapper CSS
Large computer displays (optional) 1280 and up 1200 margin: 0 auto;
width: 1200px;
Computer/iPad (landscape) 1024 960 margin: 0 auto;
width: 960px;
iPad (portrait) 768 720 margin: 0 auto;
width: 720px;
Small tablets/phones Varies Fluid margin: 0 auto;
width: 90%;

The “small tablets/phones” layouts typically collapse to a single column and are the only truly fluid layouts I use; the larger break points go to fixed widths, which makes for easier scaling of columnar content.

Note that I typically follow the convention of placing everything inside my <body> tags inside a <div id="wrapper"> tag, which allows me to apply CSS to the overall page body and separate CSS to the foreground content (what’s inside the “wrapper”).

Occasionally I will split “small tablets/phones” into two separate break points, with small tablets somewhere between 500 and 640 pixels. I may also change the content widths somewhat to suit the specifics of the design.

Mobile-First Sounds Great, but Let’s Be Honest: It’s Really IE8-First

Earlier in the year, Luke Wroblewski took the idea of RWD a step further with his inspired vision for Mobile-First web design. Initially I wholeheartedly embraced mobile-first, but I’ve since reconsidered.

What is mobile-first? It’s RWD, but instead of starting from the desktop layout and using CSS3 media queries to adjust the layout to smaller screens, it starts from the small screens and works its way up. The main benefit of this approach is that it allows you to prevent mobile devices from loading unnecessary assets (images, etc.) that they won’t actually use.

There’s a major downside to mobile-first, however, at least in my experience trying to implement it: there are still a lot of people using Internet Explorer 8 (and earlier), which does not support CSS3 media queries. So unless you create an IE-specific stylesheet (using conditional comments), IE8 and earlier users will be stuck with a strange variation on the phone version of your site.

So after building a few mobile-first RWD sites, I have abandoned that approach, and gone with what could be called an IE8-first approach. I am not really building to IE8. I work primarily on a Mac, and I preview my work in Chrome while I’m developing. But what I mean is I’ve gone back to that standard 1024×768 screen as the baseline for my CSS, with CSS3 media queries for the smaller screen sizes (as well as for print and high-resolution displays, the latter of which is next up).

Getting Retinal

Remember earlier when I said your designs should be in Illustrator rather than Photoshop? Here’s why: high resolution. Sure, you can change resolution in Photoshop too, but… wait, you’re not still slicing-and-dicing, are you? By working with discrete objects in Illustrator, resolution-independent and, when possible, vector-based, you have the maximum flexibility when you render these objects out as 24-bit PNGs with alpha channel transparency. (You are doing that too, right?)

Starting with the iPhone 4, Apple introduced the “Retina Display” which is their marketing term for, basically, screens with pixels too small for you to see. The goal is to achieve a level of resolution on an LCD screen that rivals print. The exact pixels-per-inch varies from screen to screen, and is not really too significant. The key point is that above a certain pixel density threshold, CSS treats all pixel-based measurements as pixel-doubled. As I noted above, although the current iPad screen resolution is 2048×1536, its effective pixel size in CSS is still 1024×768. There is a practical reason for this (if CSS stuck with the actual pixels, all web pages would appear absurdly tiny on such a screen). But there’s also a practical downside: most images on most web pages are now being scaled up in the browser to these pixel-doubled dimensions, resulting in a blurry appearance.

But here’s something really cool: you can specify the display dimensions of an image in CSS, and the browser will scale the image down on-the-fly. This has been the bane of many web developers’ existence for years, where people who didn’t know better would upload a very large, high resolution photo and scale it down in the page, resulting in ridiculous download times as the image slowly drew in on the page.

Used effectively, however, this characteristic provides an extremely easy way to make images high-resolution on displays that support it. By using CSS to scale the dimensions of an image to 1/2 its actual pixel size, the image will display in full resolution on screens that support this.

Of course, doubled dimensions mean quadrupled pixels, and depending on the details of JPEG or PNG compression, the high-resolution images may be more than four times the file size of their standard-resolution equivalents. So it’s nice to, again, use CSS3 media queries to only deliver these high-resolution replacement images to screens that can display them properly. (This will be demonstrated in the full example code below.)

You Say Graceful Degradation, I Say Progressive Enhancement

The matter of graceful degradation and/or progressive enhancement (depending on how you look at it) is tangential to RWD, but it’s something you’re likely to be dealing with as you build a responsive website.

Not all browsers support all CSS3 capabilities, but that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t use them. I’m especially fond of box-shadow and border-radius, and in working with RWD you’ll probably get quite familiar with background-size as well. Remember that most of these newer capabilities will probably need to include vendor prefixes (like -moz- and -webkit-) as well. It’s cumbersome, and will probably be as painful to clean up as <blink> tags in a few years, but for now it’s the way to get things done.

The biggest challenge with progressive enhancement may well be convincing site stakeholders that it’s OK for the site to look (subtly) different in different browsers. Then again, if you’re doing RWD, that should be a given.

So, What Does This Actually Look Like?

As I’ve iterated my RWD approach this summer, I’ve inched closer and closer to a standard template I can use to start a new website. I feel it’s not quite there yet, but my basic CSS file structure is standardized enough that I can share it here. In a subsequent post, I hope to provide a zip download containing a full template file set for creating a new responsive website.

Here’s a rough example of what my typical CSS file looks like. Again, personal preferences dominate here: I like to write my CSS from scratch, and I typically organize it into three sections: standard HTML (basic tags), CSS classes (anything starting with a period), and DOM elements (anything starting with a hash mark).

The idea is that we’re going from general to specific. Within the standard HTML and CSS classes I alphabetize everything, so it’s easier to find things to change them as I go. Within the DOM elements I try to keep everything in the order it actually appears in the HTML structure. (I also alphabetize the properties within each element definition… but that’s just because I’m anal retentive.)

Sample CSS File

/* IMPORT */

@import url('reset.css');


body {
  font-size: 100%;
  line-height: 1.5em;


.column {
  float: left;
  margin: 0 5% 1.5em 0;
  width: 45%;


#wrapper {
  margin: 0 auto;
  width: 960px;

#logo {
  background: transparent url('img/logo.png') center center no-repeat;
  -moz-background-size: 250px 100px;
  -webkit-background-size: 250px 100px;
  background-size: 250px 100px;
  height: 100px;
  width: 250px;


/* PRINT */
@media print {

  * {
    background: transparent !important;
    color: black !important;
    text-shadow: none !important;
    filter: none !important;
    -ms-filter: none !important;
  @page { margin: 0.5cm; }
  h1, h2, h3, p { orphans: 3; widows: 3; }
  h1, h2, h3 { page-break-after: avoid; }
  pre, blockquote { border: 1px solid #999; page-break-inside: avoid; }
  abbr[title]:after { content: " (" attr(title) ")"; }
  a, a:visited { color: #444 !important; text-decoration: underline; }
  a[href]:after { content: " (" attr(href) ")"; }
  a[href^="javascript:"]:after, a[href^="#"]:after { content: ""; }
  img { max-width: 100% !important; page-break-inside: avoid; }
  thead { display: table-header-group; }
  tr { page-break-inside: avoid; }


@media screen and (max-width: 1023px) {

  #wrapper {
    width: 720px;


@media screen and (max-width: 757px) {

  #wrapper {
    width: 90%;


@media only screen and (-moz-min-device-pixel-ratio: 1.5),
    only screen and (-o-min-device-pixel-ratio: 3/2),
    only screen and (-webkit-min-device-pixel-ratio: 1.5),
    only screen and (min-devicepixel-ratio: 1.5),
    only screen and (min-resolution: 1.5dppx)

  #logo {
    background-image: url('img/logo_x2.png');


The Test Suite

Of course, all of this work means nothing until we’ve seen what it actually looks like in the web browsers on these different devices. To that end, a decent test suite is essential.

One cool trick about RWD, which is not only useful to dazzle clients when pitching a RWD approach to their websites, but is also helpful for quick testing as you go, is that the responsive approach works simply by making your browser window smaller on a computer. So you can shrink the window down and approximate what the site will look like on a tablet or a phone without actually having one in your hand at all times.

But before you go live, you do need to test it for real on different devices, just like you need to test in different browsers. The table below shows my test suite. It’s not comprehensive, but it’s practical, and it all fits in one small messenger bag.

Device Operating System Browser(s)
MacBook Air Mac OS X Mountain Lion Chrome (latest)
Firefox (latest)
Safari (latest)
MacBook Air
with Boot Camp
Windows 7 Internet Explorer 9
Chrome (latest)
Firefox (latest)
MacBook Air
with Parallels Desktop
Windows XP
(3 separate virtual machines)
Internet Explorer 8
Internet Explorer 7
Internet Explorer 6
Firefox 3.6
Note: I only offer my clients very limited support for IE6.
iPad (Retina Display) iOS 6 Mobile Safari (latest)
Chrome (latest)
iPhone (Retina Display) iOS 6 Mobile Safari (latest)
Chrome (latest)
Samsung Galaxy Player 4
Android 2.3 Android web browser

Give Me Something I Can Print!

You may have noticed in the full example CSS above that I included CSS3 media queries for print. The need for decent print output will vary by project — different sites’ audiences may be more or less inclined to print out pages. In general I think of printing out web pages a bit like I think about… well, honestly, I can’t even think of a good analogy. You just shouldn’t do it. But sometimes it has to happen. I won’t be exploring the infuriating nuances of print CSS here, other than to say that if you do need to support printing, the code provided in this sample is a good place to start. (Sadly, although I use it regularly, I neglected to make note of its source. If you know where it’s from, please let me know in the comments.)

Where Do We Go Now?

OK Axl, hang on. I know I’ve dumped a lot on you here to think about, without necessarily providing enough specifics. But that’s kind of the point: in order to do this right, you really need to learn it for yourself and gain the experience of building RWD sites directly. This is what has been working for me but my approach is certainly neither the only nor the best way, I’m sure.

My hope is to follow up this post with a “Part Two” entry this time around, where I get into more of the specifics of an actual example website. In the meantime, experiment and discover! And be sure to check out the entire A Book Apart series, as they provide the conceptual and detailed knowledge needed to get started with this exciting new approach to web design.

Sleep is now available

We all need more Sleep, right? Now you can download my latest album for free from Bandcamp.

Sleep began as a concept for my 6-year-old daughter. Last November, she asked me to record an album for her to listen to as she fell asleep. The first track I recorded at the time was what became “Rapid Eye Movement,” and she immediately declared it a failure… it was too creepy for her to fall asleep to, she said.

I quickly realized that any album I made about the concept of sleep was going to veer off into dark and mysterious territory not suitable for peacefully lulling a 6-year-old off into dreamland. And maybe that’s the point. Sleep is not just peaceful rest. It’s a dark and strange landscape where our minds confront their deepest fears and desires, where our subconscious comes out to play… or to wreak havoc. Sure, there are also moments of peace and bliss, but sleep is many different things, sometimes all at once. This album seeks to capture the essence of sleep in all its complexity.

After my daughter wrote off the album, I largely did too. Or so I thought. But over a period of months I accumulated a grab bag of musical sketches and partially-complete tracks, composed primarily late at night on my iPad as I lie awake in bed. Then in mid-June, my 9-year-old son drew a surreal picture he called “The Super Weird Face.” It had a strange, dream- (or nightmare-) like quality. Immediately I knew it was the cover art for the album, and it inspired me to collect all of these stray musical ideas I had been working on and turn them into the final collection of 17 tracks that comprise the finished album.

My one sentence summary is this: The album is a sonic journey into, through, and out of the landscape of sleep and dreams.

Please have a listen and let me know what you think! (If you really like it, you can also buy the CD for $8.99 from Kunaki.)

Front cover art

Insert art

Jewel case back tray art

CD print art