Adaptive vs. Responsive Design: Selecting the Appropriate Method for Your Project

Image: goodbadmarketing

Before we could access the internet on our smartphones and tablets, things were easier. In order to have an online presence, a website has to be designed with a desktop and maybe a laptop in mind. These days, however, a wide range of screen sizes must be taken into account and supported, from bigger desktop and laptop displays to tiny mobile phone and tablet screens. This is especially important since users will immediately navigate away from a webpage if it doesn't appear correctly on their chosen device.

Responsive design and adaptable design are the two ways to make sure a website is optimized for displays on smartphones, tablets, laptops, and PCs. Even though both aim to address the same issue, they use distinct approaches.

Making the right choice for your next UX project will be made easier if you understand how both of these methods differ from one another.

1. What is responsive design?

When a website is designed using responsive design, its elements "responsively" change to match the screen of the device being used to view it. This allows the layout to work for both desktop and mobile users. 

The secret to building flexible websites, which are usually created with HTML and CSS or HTML5 and CSS3, is to use queries to target breakpoints, or places on a page where the layout changes to accommodate varying device sizes. These breakpoints suit the layout on all screens, wrap text, and scale pictures. 

Image: uxpin

Every user interface (UI) is viewed as one in this design approach. You simply need to create one layout design, and the UI and content change smoothly. 

What’s adaptive design?

For adaptive sites, designers create numerous fixed layouts to match the device a site is viewed on.

Different layouts for various screen sizes are used in adaptive design, typically with templates for the resolution of each device. Layouts for the six most popular widths—320, 480, 760, 960, 1200, and 1600 pixels—are frequently created by designers. Content needs to adjust to different resolution ranges on tablets, smartphones, smartwatches, and displays in order to be displayed correctly.

Image: creativemarket

Adaptive websites make advantage of responsive design's CSS queries together with JavaScript-based improvements to modify the HTML markup of the website according to the device. We call this "progressive enhancement." This design approach just needs layout templates kept in one place rather than several designs. 

The positive and negative's of responsive design

The biggest benefit of responsive design, as seen by UX designers, is that it requires a great deal less effort than adaptable design, both in terms of original creation and ongoing maintenance. In addition, responsive websites can support an unlimited range of screen sizes, which is fortunate because it appears that new and unusually sized devices are constantly being developed. Because responsive websites are seen as mobile-friendly, they also perform higher in search engine results.

However, responsive websites need additional code from developers; even with tight collaboration between UX designers and developers to ensure that the layout is functional on a wide range of devices, controlling the layout across all devices is difficult. Because of this, a webpage might not be set up to provide the optimal user experience on some devices. In addition, a responsive site may load more slowly since the complete website's code is provided, no matter the device you're using to view it. Moreover harming the user experience is this.

The positive and negative's of adaptive design

The many layouts needed for an adaptable design might be simpler for a UX designer to create because wireframes for each screen size's fixed width are all that are needed. This means that the UX designer is able to ensure that the user experience is optimized for every screen size and has complete control over every layout. Therefore, the UX designer is free to provide different material for different screen sizes if they think it makes sense to do so.

Think about an e-commerce platform's adaptive user interface design, for example. A grid structure showing product categories, popular products, and promotional banners might be seen on the homepage of a desktop website. At the same time, the mobile version may include a more straightforward UI including an easily noticeable search box, instant access to products that have been recently seen, and a streamlined menu for effortless navigating. This adaptive strategy makes sure that the user experience is excellent on both devices by customizing the style and content to fit the unique needs and preferences of desktop and mobile users.

Compared to responsive sites, adaptive sites run considerably quicker since they only provide the code required for the specified screen size, making them simpler for developers to deploy.

However, a UX designer may find it challenging to address adaptive design. Although developing for just two or three of the six popular screen sizes might reduce the amount of work, the site won't format appropriately if customers view it on a device for which it wasn't designed. Uncommon screen sizes won't be supported, even if all six screen sizes are intended for them.

Responsive or adaptive design: which is better?

Ultimately, no matter the design approach you choose, the most important thing is to prioritize your audience. It is simpler to design with them in mind when it comes to various layouts, content, and other aspects of the website once you have a clear understanding of their demographic and the devices they often use to access it.

Image: interaction-design

It will also primarily depend on whether you're beginning from scratch or whether you have an existing website to work with. It's estimated that 1/8 of websites already employ responsive design, which has become the standard design style (but there's little to no statistics on how many use adaptive). The pace of adoption of responsive websites is also increasing significantly, nearly matching that of standalone mobile websites.

Taking all of things into consideration, it's reasonable to state that responsive design is typically the method of choice—if only due to the constant effort that adaptive design requires.

However, a research conducted by Catchpoint suggests that adaptive could be the better choice if a customer or organization has the budget. They used WordPress to create two different websites: one with the default TwentyFourteen responsive theme and the other with the help of the Wiziapp plugin.

Image: catchpoint

Depending on the device a user is using to view the website, the plugin displays a mobile theme to them. It also provides advanced configuration options to help you further optimize the process.

While it should be noticed that no optimization was done, this does demonstrate that the responsive site is downloading all necessary files for the desktop machine. Thus, the theme doesn't provide a very strong performance out of the box.

While media queries may again be used to get around this, the example above shows why responsive UX design isn't always the greatest option for smartphones, despite its popularity. It's hard to know what we can do about it other than learn how to properly code and put together a fantastic responsive site, though, until something better comes along.

So what's the verdict?

It's possible that responsive design will continue to be popular because we haven't come up with a good way to handle the extensive upkeep that adaptive design requires. Despite the web's apparent fondness for responsive design, adaptive web design is still relevant, so it's possible—at least in theory—that new advancements in this field will surpass the capabilities of responsive web design.

Conclusion

In conclusion, a project's needs, budget, and target audience are the main determinants of whether to use responsive or adaptive design. Because of its affordability and great compatibility with many screen sizes, responsive design is extensively used. Although it requires additional resources, adaptive design provides a more customized user experience.

For the majority of projects, responsive design is the preferred option due to its popularity and practicality. However, adaptive design could offer a more sophisticated option for an improved user experience on certain devices in situations with limited financial resources. The choice should be in line with the requirements of the project; even if responsive design is the norm right now, future developments might change the situation. The user experience always comes first, no matter which strategy is used.