Interesting concepts. I thought everybody charged more for it and if the client doesn't want it, well you iron out the issues. Some say it should be included, others say to know how many mobile users sites get, etc.
Damn, I don't think there is a clear cut "best answer" out there eh?
Sure workflow is an issue, client education is an issue, getting PAID is an issue. Responsive design is no longer optional, get over it, fix your deliverables and workflow, or move on to a new job. It's an ethics test.
Anyone else remember when css and 'div' soup was an optional (extra) because workflow went from PSD to table based layouts? It was hard to compete with the quick 'table' slicers while mastering new skills to build solutions the right way. (It is a repeating and ever escalating cycle that will not stop.)
Selling a lemon you know is not a good fit for the customer, something that will have to be scrapped and replaced or completely overhauled in a year or two? That doesn't just screw your client today, it makes a lasting impression about our profession, it kills trust, it screws us all!
I'll propose it if its a good fit. I dont add an additional charge for it. Though I will inform the client about the additional time spent on to complete the project responsively as I bill by the hour.
I'll propose it if its a good fit. I dont add an additional charge for it. Though I will inform the client about the additional time spent on to complete the project responsively as I bill by the hour.
I think that responsive design if done properly should be charged for and thus should be proposed to the respective client. In some cases they may not need a responsive site but rather a dedicated mobile site. See my post: http://bit.ly/WICAgC
Jeremiah - 11 years ago
Anyone who says responsive is a must is pretensious and inexperienced. Not all project require it. Depends totally on the project.
I have been making all my projects responsive and I already include an extra charge when I price the project, so it doesn't look like an add on for the project, responsive is a must if you want to offer the best for your clients.
Nowadays a responsive design should be standard, but it rather depends on the complexity of the project. Since it can be very much work to make an enormous site responsice you should charge fot it.
I'm with Jon. Unless a significant amount of traffic to the site is from mobile devices I wont push it on the client. If they absolutely wanted it I'll bill them near what the cost of what a desktop and mobile website package would be.
jamie - 12 years ago
To those who don't think you should charge extra, do you not bill hourly? Or do you do fix price? Either way the client is still really paying for it. If a plain, fixed width site took you 20 hours would you then only spend 20 hours making that same site responsive? I am honestly just curious. What frameworks are being used that allow you to improve your development speed that much? I've gotta try them!
Every website we build is fully functional on mobile. But building them responsive simply isn't always worth my clients' time or money, and if I don't think it will specifically add value (ROI for them), I don't propose it.
I propose a responsive design to my client, explain it and tell them everything they need to know about the process and how much more it will cost. At that point if they say no, I reiterate how it will benefit them. If they still don't bite, I give up and make a normal site for them.
2 months usually go by before they ask if I can make their site "mobile friendly". I shake my head and gladly take their money :)
Corey Machanic - 12 years ago
I believe: To do responsive design properly, and to maintain that content hierarchy and flow you spend so much time on, you have to add the additional forethought to your process to see how the content is going to display at all of the various breakpoints. Inevitably, this is going to trickle down into the front-end development. Responsive design means spending more time on your CSS (i.e. media queries), image production (retina display?), and quality assurance testing. All of this requires additional time—which means more money, right? How much? Well, to each its own.
Sure, but I wouldn't offer a cheaper quote in exchange for *not* cross-browser testing. It's an integral part of the overall process, not an optional extra. I think responsive design/dev is becoming that important, or arguably is that important now. So if I was scoping out a project quote, which would be based on the time and resources invested, then I'd account for that.
I suppose it's the difference between accounting for responsive dev/design within a quote - which, yes, may make quotes more expensive - as opposed to having it as an optional extra. I'll do the former, not the latter.
Robin - I'd agree but the amount of extra work I had to put in with a recent project there is no way - no way - it couldnt be billed. Even using HTML5 boilerplate with Bootstrap, getting everything right took an enormous amount of time. Using browserstack.com helped with the key viewports and devices. Its more work, more time, more expertise to learn it/execute it. Cross-browser testing is an enormous aspect of design and dev - do you not charge for that? I sure do.
I think it's reaching a stage (if it hasn't already) where responsive websites are just...well...websites. I don't think an extra charge is warranted any more. Given the frameworks and widespread support of the technologies necessary to implement responsive design as part of the overall process, it should be inherent.
Good morning :) I was interested enough your post :) I do not usually comment on blogs but here I am! I really liked your blog :)
Interesting concepts. I thought everybody charged more for it and if the client doesn't want it, well you iron out the issues. Some say it should be included, others say to know how many mobile users sites get, etc.
Damn, I don't think there is a clear cut "best answer" out there eh?
Sure workflow is an issue, client education is an issue, getting PAID is an issue. Responsive design is no longer optional, get over it, fix your deliverables and workflow, or move on to a new job. It's an ethics test.
Anyone else remember when css and 'div' soup was an optional (extra) because workflow went from PSD to table based layouts? It was hard to compete with the quick 'table' slicers while mastering new skills to build solutions the right way. (It is a repeating and ever escalating cycle that will not stop.)
Selling a lemon you know is not a good fit for the customer, something that will have to be scrapped and replaced or completely overhauled in a year or two? That doesn't just screw your client today, it makes a lasting impression about our profession, it kills trust, it screws us all!
I'll propose it if its a good fit. I dont add an additional charge for it. Though I will inform the client about the additional time spent on to complete the project responsively as I bill by the hour.
I'll propose it if its a good fit. I dont add an additional charge for it. Though I will inform the client about the additional time spent on to complete the project responsively as I bill by the hour.
I think that responsive design if done properly should be charged for and thus should be proposed to the respective client. In some cases they may not need a responsive site but rather a dedicated mobile site. See my post: http://bit.ly/WICAgC
Anyone who says responsive is a must is pretensious and inexperienced. Not all project require it. Depends totally on the project.
I have been making all my projects responsive and I already include an extra charge when I price the project, so it doesn't look like an add on for the project, responsive is a must if you want to offer the best for your clients.
Nowadays a responsive design should be standard, but it rather depends on the complexity of the project. Since it can be very much work to make an enormous site responsice you should charge fot it.
I'm with Jon. Unless a significant amount of traffic to the site is from mobile devices I wont push it on the client. If they absolutely wanted it I'll bill them near what the cost of what a desktop and mobile website package would be.
To those who don't think you should charge extra, do you not bill hourly? Or do you do fix price? Either way the client is still really paying for it. If a plain, fixed width site took you 20 hours would you then only spend 20 hours making that same site responsive? I am honestly just curious. What frameworks are being used that allow you to improve your development speed that much? I've gotta try them!
Depends on the scope of the project..
Yes, depends..in which client is comfortable and his requirements. We can only propose them.
Thanks,
Mufeed Ahmad
Every website we build is fully functional on mobile. But building them responsive simply isn't always worth my clients' time or money, and if I don't think it will specifically add value (ROI for them), I don't propose it.
It's more work and I believe to be successful at freelance web design you have to charge by amount of work.
I propose a responsive design to my client, explain it and tell them everything they need to know about the process and how much more it will cost. At that point if they say no, I reiterate how it will benefit them. If they still don't bite, I give up and make a normal site for them.
2 months usually go by before they ask if I can make their site "mobile friendly". I shake my head and gladly take their money :)
I believe: To do responsive design properly, and to maintain that content hierarchy and flow you spend so much time on, you have to add the additional forethought to your process to see how the content is going to display at all of the various breakpoints. Inevitably, this is going to trickle down into the front-end development. Responsive design means spending more time on your CSS (i.e. media queries), image production (retina display?), and quality assurance testing. All of this requires additional time—which means more money, right? How much? Well, to each its own.
Sure, but I wouldn't offer a cheaper quote in exchange for *not* cross-browser testing. It's an integral part of the overall process, not an optional extra. I think responsive design/dev is becoming that important, or arguably is that important now. So if I was scoping out a project quote, which would be based on the time and resources invested, then I'd account for that.
I suppose it's the difference between accounting for responsive dev/design within a quote - which, yes, may make quotes more expensive - as opposed to having it as an optional extra. I'll do the former, not the latter.
Robin - I'd agree but the amount of extra work I had to put in with a recent project there is no way - no way - it couldnt be billed. Even using HTML5 boilerplate with Bootstrap, getting everything right took an enormous amount of time. Using browserstack.com helped with the key viewports and devices. Its more work, more time, more expertise to learn it/execute it. Cross-browser testing is an enormous aspect of design and dev - do you not charge for that? I sure do.
I think it's reaching a stage (if it hasn't already) where responsive websites are just...well...websites. I don't think an extra charge is warranted any more. Given the frameworks and widespread support of the technologies necessary to implement responsive design as part of the overall process, it should be inherent.