[HN Gopher] Unifying our mobile and desktop domains
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Unifying our mobile and desktop domains
        
       Author : todsacerdoti
       Score  : 179 points
       Date   : 2025-11-25 17:07 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (techblog.wikimedia.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (techblog.wikimedia.org)
        
       | janpio wrote:
       | Great job.
       | 
       | I was hoping this was a unification of the both layouts as well,
       | that would have been really impressive. The mobile version of the
       | article pages is great, but getting both versions from the same
       | frontend would be an amazing case study.
        
         | bawolff wrote:
         | The mobile site is relatively unpopular among editors, i think
         | there would be a riot if they did that.
         | 
         | That said, there is a "desktop" version of the mobile skin, you
         | can get it by appending ?useskin=minerva to a wikipedia url.
        
           | Akronymus wrote:
           | I use that trick to still get the vector layout. No version
           | past that is to my personal liking.
        
             | bawolff wrote:
             | If you log in, you can set it in your preferences so its
             | sticky.
        
         | NooneAtAll3 wrote:
         | wdym?
         | 
         | isn't "new" pc design that's been around for last couple years
         | pretty much mobile one already? (and thus ugly af)
        
           | bawolff wrote:
           | The new one (called vector-2022) is much closer to mobile
           | stylings, but not the same. The mobile skin is called
           | minerva. On top of that the mobile site makes some changes to
           | the content to simplify it, and replaces some elements.
        
       | lxgr wrote:
       | Finally! But...
       | 
       | > Wikipedia's use of it is surprising to our present day
       | audience, and it may decrease the perceived strength of domain
       | branding
       | 
       | Really? _That's_ the reasoning, and not the fact that _mobile
       | links forwarded to desktop browsers would render the mobile
       | view_?!
        
         | pr337h4m wrote:
         | The mobile view is a really pleasant reading experience on
         | desktop.
        
           | lxgr wrote:
           | Admittedly, it does make for some good impromptu neck
           | exercises on any typical screen.
        
         | bawolff wrote:
         | > Really? That's the reasoning, and not the fact that mobile
         | links forwarded to desktop browsers would render the mobile
         | view?!
         | 
         | If you read the more technical internal rationals instead of
         | just the press release, what you said is mentioned as one of
         | the reasons for the change
         | 
         | https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Mobile_d...
        
         | LeoPanthera wrote:
         | It's surely much less of a problem than most non-technical
         | users wondering why Wikipedia URLs start with "en" instead of
         | "www".
        
           | autoexec wrote:
           | I'd be surprised if anyone but the oldest non-technical users
           | had any idea what the "www" was or why it would or wouldn't
           | be at the front of a URL. It takes zero technical knowledge
           | to understand "en" indicates the language and probably rarely
           | comes up since you can use www or omit the en and links
           | mostly just work.
        
           | lxgr wrote:
           | They might wonder (although I doubt it), but it's nothing
           | actionable.
           | 
           | With m., they used to see a mobile layout that's a really
           | poor fit for a desktop screen and that they would have
           | manually switch out of via some relatively obscure button.
        
             | account42 wrote:
             | > but it's nothing actionable
             | 
             | Of course it is, they just need to drop the pretense that
             | English is not the default.
        
         | loeg wrote:
         | Hey, when you spend over $100 million a year to run your
         | website, that's the kind of thoughtful analysis one might
         | expect.
        
       | sedatk wrote:
       | That's a welcome development albeit late, but more importantly,
       | they should address the "can't link to a highlight" problem on
       | mobile. When all sections are collapsed by default, browser won't
       | scroll to the relevant section.
       | 
       | A random "link to highlight" example:
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_I_of_Cyprus#:~:text=On%2...
       | 
       | Such a link doesn't work on mobile if it points inside a
       | collapsed section.
       | 
       | That makes directing people to relevant content on mobile really
       | hard, and I end up sending screenshots instead.
       | 
       | EDIT: "Link to fragment"s had the same problem, but apparently,
       | they fixed it. Thanks for that too!
        
         | kevin_thibedeau wrote:
         | You also can't search for text in collapsed sections.
        
         | flexagoon wrote:
         | The link in your comment works perfectly fine for me in Chrome
         | Android, and highlights the part
        
       | SchemaLoad wrote:
       | About 10 years late, I can't think of any websites other than
       | Wikipedia still doing the mobile domain.
        
         | layer8 wrote:
         | YouTube? Twitch? FaceBook? GSMArena? There are lots.
        
           | sedatk wrote:
           | m.youtube.com and m.facebook.com redirect you to main
           | "m-less" domain when on desktop. That was the greatest
           | problem with Wikipedia. You had to experience that mobile
           | layout on desktop unless you edited the address line and
           | reloaded the page.
        
             | SoKamil wrote:
             | m.wikipedia.org was a feature, not a bug. The interface is
             | good on desktop. For some time, before Wikipedia did a
             | desktop site rework, this was my go-to frontend.
        
         | micromacrofoot wrote:
         | late for what?
        
           | sedatk wrote:
           | Late for fixing design and UX bifurcation.
        
           | NooneAtAll3 wrote:
           | pc website redirected mobile users from the very beginning
           | 
           | mobile website did not redirect pc users
           | 
           | 10 years late at fixing this very basic problem
        
             | micromacrofoot wrote:
             | again though... late for what? it's not like someone else
             | came along, did it better, and now wikipedia is some
             | dwindling anachronism
             | 
             | they didn't jump on the shifting trends immediately, got to
             | it eventually when it was the clear path, and implemented
             | it in a completely reasonable way... they may have actually
             | benefited quite a bit for directions to settle
        
               | NooneAtAll3 wrote:
               | > implemented it in a completely reasonable way...
               | 
               | ...no? A LOT no?
               | 
               | one-way pc/mobile redirect is not reasonable, whatsoever
        
               | micromacrofoot wrote:
               | the current result, not the previous state
        
         | eru wrote:
         | https://m.xkcd.com/ is one example that I actually find useful.
         | 
         | (Well, the mobile view is useful. Not sure whether splitting it
         | off into its own domain is useful.)
        
           | encrypted_bird wrote:
           | I agree. AFAICT there is no way to view a comic's alt-text on
           | mobile on the desktop site. (Also, the desktop site is way
           | too zoomed out.)
        
             | RealStickman_ wrote:
             | Long press on the image to get the alt-text on desktop xkcd
        
               | encrypted_bird wrote:
               | I've been following that webcomic for 15 years. How the
               | crap have I never noticed that before??
        
           | Insanity wrote:
           | Very touching current XKCD. https://xkcd.com/3172.
           | 
           | Guess this also means I'm getting old as I remember the
           | earlier comics about his partner going through this. I think
           | this is the first one I read after I became a "weekly
           | reader": https://xkcd.com/1141.
        
       | jonny_eh wrote:
       | Now it's your turn YouTube...
        
       | porphyra wrote:
       | It was mildly annoying how en.wikipedia.org would redirect to
       | en.m.wikipedia.org on mobile, but en.m.wikipedia.org wouldn't
       | redirect to en.wikipedia.org on desktop. So when a mobile user
       | sent me a link, I had to go and manually delete the '.m' in order
       | to view it nicely. But I guess it makes sense since desktop
       | developers need to be able to see the mobile site sometimes.
        
         | sfRattan wrote:
         | There was a period I can recall, maybe 2010 to 2020 most
         | prominently, when a subset of HN readers strongly preferred the
         | mobile Wikipedia site, even on desktop, and would always use
         | ".m" linking to Wikipedia articles in comments threads. This
         | also seemed to happen in reddit threads during that decade.
         | 
         | I sort of remember some of the older MediaWiki desktop themes
         | looking worse than the mobile theme, but it was never enough
         | for me personally to try always using the mobile site at the
         | time. I do still strongly prefer old.reddit.com... For as long
         | as that portal continues to exist.
        
           | porphyra wrote:
           | Yeah, in the olden days, there was no max-width for desktop
           | wikipedia, so the readability was not good.
        
             | internetter wrote:
             | I still use the old site and personally prefer it
        
         | Wowfunhappy wrote:
         | > But I guess it makes sense since desktop developers need to
         | be able to see the mobile site sometimes.
         | 
         | IMO this isn't a good reason. Developers can change the user
         | agent.
         | 
         | (I also imagine there could be a no-redirect preference for
         | logged in users. Or even just a special query string you could
         | add to the end of a url.)
        
           | booi wrote:
           | You would just change the dimensions using the browser
           | devtools no user agent faking needed
        
             | eru wrote:
             | I'm not sure dimensions are all that's different?
             | 
             | Your website might want to present a different interface
             | for people using mouse and keyboard than for people using
             | tiny touch screens? Even if the number of pixels in the
             | browser window is otherwise the same.
        
             | Wowfunhappy wrote:
             | I think Wikipedia redirected based on user agent, but yes,
             | whatever, point is if you're a developer you can use the
             | browser devtools to simulate whatever you need.
        
         | wolrah wrote:
         | I have always hated "m." domains for exactly this reason. They
         | almost exclusively go one-way, mobile users get redirected to
         | the mobile domain but desktop users never get redirected back,
         | and all too often not only was the mobile version of the site
         | objectively worse from the perspective of a desktop user but
         | even the link to go back manually was either hard to find or
         | nonexistent.
         | 
         | Wikipedia was one of the worst offenders, but lots of sites
         | screwed this up in exactly the same way, and I feel it was a
         | predecessor to modern "mobile first" web platforms that either
         | treat desktop as second-class users or actively don't want
         | desktop users.
        
           | theshrike79 wrote:
           | The m. was still better than the (thankfully short-lived) fad
           | of everyone buying a .mobi or similar domain for their mobile
           | site.
           | 
           | Like the subdomain was RIGHT THERE.
        
         | andrepd wrote:
         | > But I guess it makes sense since desktop developers need to
         | be able to see the mobile site sometimes.
         | 
         | That is not at all the reason; did you read the article?.
         | 
         | Also web developers can just use devtools to simulate a mobile
         | browser.
        
         | phkx wrote:
         | I use the mobile page on desktop. Less clutter is always
         | welcome.
        
         | ncruces wrote:
         | Tapping the share button (on mobile) instead of copying the
         | link always used the non-mobile address, AFAICT.
        
       | fowl2 wrote:
       | Incredible that no one from Google noticed this as a regression
       | from their side and either put a workaround in or contacted
       | Wikimedia.
        
       | westurner wrote:
       | BUG: show the Table of Contents (TOC) in mobile mode
       | 
       | Users probably especially want to deep link to #headings on
       | mobile devices
        
       | bhouston wrote:
       | Nice engineering work and very clear write-up. I love these types
       | of optimizations.
       | 
       | BTW found this writeup on the Wikipedia CDN:
       | https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wiki/CDN
        
       | xnx wrote:
       | Subdomains for mobile sites were almost as dumb as www2 www3 for
       | load balancing.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-11-26 23:02 UTC)