Tell that to the hundreds of millions of people around the world who can only afford to connect to the web via a mobile phone. We just have to accept that browsing the web this way will outstrip desktop computers sooner or later, and it’s a reality we have to accept and deal with.
The fact that a layout can easily be made to adapt to different screen sizes is one of the beauties of the web, imho.
I think everyone who likes puppies, should die.
Please discuss…
They will die, eventually. End of discussion. 
Too limiting.
I think most people should die…
In the video he’s just advocating adaptive design, and not stopping at responsive design The title is a red herring…
As far as the comments go on small screens, I’ve built a lot of sites for a lot of communities, many of whom are very mobile/active - the mobile devices are very relevant in their context. Nothing lasts forever, including every site I have built, and all my designs going forward are responsive/adaptive because thats the way the market, and my audience (including me) are going. I see bigger screens as a powerful way to prepare for a smaller screen, a bit like packing for a holiday - I know what I want to do while on the mobile device and I can use a big-screen to make the small screen experience optimal, “packing what I need”
What he is referring to has been LONG known as RESS (responsive web design + server-side components). It is nothing new. I think most developers just lump it all under “responsive web design” – I know I do. So putting aside the stupid title I agree with him 100%. Shoe horning content into a screen size is not proper ux. Proper ux is understanding the need of the customer on specific device(s) and providing variations of the experience to suite. Though the title is off-putting that is really all he is saying.
He presents a fairly weak argument in that video, imho. He doesn’t represent responsive web design fairly (example—at the end he mentions the potential for 100 breakpoints, which is nonsense, and would simply represent a bad approach to RWD). He also makes the problematic assumption that we can know what an end user’s purpose is, which isn’t reasonable.
I suspect that, when people argue for or against RWD, they have a particular kind of site in mind. I still feel that, if a site’s content doesn’t work on a small device, then there’s a problem with the site’s content, not the technology used to create it. If it isn’t easy to find a contact number for a business on either desktop or mobile, that’s a content strategy failure. People still have a love affair with bloated, unnecessary content, which is the main reason RWD is getting a bad name.
I agree that things like a tele # should be easy to find. I also agree that content is king and should be easily viewable on any device.
But as I mention in my new thread From 3-Column Design to Responsive Design, I think that things like a 2-column and 3-column layout have benefits, and it scares me to think that they must be sacrificed for RWD.
In my mind, that is taking content that DOES work on desktops and breaking it for the sake of mobile devices, which goes against what you are saying. Put another way, content should work on all devices for RWD to be the winner.
If you have thoughts on this point, please join the discussion in my latest thread!!
I’m sure I have already pointed out that this is not the case. You can still have 3 or 2 column designs in a responsive site.
What…?
I mean, they must be sacrified in the sense that 2 columns can’t fit side-by-side in a 320px-wide layout (so they must be stacked)?
You can still have 2 and 3-columns in RWD above says a 600px breakpoint. But what do you do below that? Make one humongous vertical scroll?
Is it acceptable to have 2-column layouts below 550px?
If not, then what?
Make everyone scroll all day - which they won’t.
Change everything to using a hamburger menu where there is only one column per screen under 550px?
I think this maybe where your lack of access to a smartphone may be constraining your thinking about how people use them. You can be reasonably certain that people with a mobile device are very used to needing to scroll down a screen for their content. What they won’t do, is interact with a webpage that tries to present itself as if it were in a desktop browser - i.e. squashing the entire page onto a single screen as if nothing about the viewport had changed. Text becomes too small to be legible, images shrink into a coloured smudge, and URLs can no long be clicked on with any degree of accuracy, if at all.
Say who? That’s not what the research shows. If the content is worthwhile, they’ll scroll. But it’s also worth adding navigation for jumping to important parts of the page.
Move left hand navigation to a hamburger, keep one column. Hypothetically the right column is an advertising space. Remove that for mobile.
There - 1 tablet. There are an infinite number of possibilities which just depends on the direction you want to take.
I do believe you’re wrong though; users WILL scroll. They always have.
I understand that don’t like a 1024x768 home page on a 300x300 display.
What I am still trying to learn, is how do I design things so people on a 300x300 smart phone still see and are motivated to read all of my great content that used to fit on 1024x768!
In the past, people would see the whole enchilada, and then could quickly decide what was important or not.
On a tiny smart phone, my fear is that all you get to show people in 1 out of 10 great things, and the chances of them ever seeing the other 9 is greatly diminished.
If you took 1024x768 content and made me scroll to see all of it, I might ditch.
So how do you keep people’s attention so they stay with you?
This is a way more advanced topic than the simple mechanics of RWD in my opinion…
So enlighten me in how I can have it all. 
So you imply that one way to make sure people see my left nd right columns is via the hamburger menu?
Do people use that thing much?
Or is the new “above the fold” just what people see on the initial load?
The page I am talking about looks like this…
Left Column:
Secondary Article #1
Secondary Article #2
Main Column:
Feature Article #1
Another Important Article #2
Right Column
Interesting Factoids
Upcoming Event
Interesting Stat
Maybe Some Ad
Some Other Thing
The Main Column is the most important. Left column is also pretty important. Right column is more eye candy or smaller things that are also more important than stuff in say the footer.
Are they more likely to scroll or use a hamburger menu?
Let’s say they will scroll for the first 4 items, but then attention drops off.
To get them to read items #5-10, do I hope they keep scrolling, or move things to a usual/known place in the hamburger menu, or other?
No, I don’t like those. But near the top of your page you could put links to content below.
