i.engadget.com - Engadget for your iPhone or iPod touch

For obvious reasons, we're not really big believers in optimizing Engadget for individual devices or platforms. Despite the unrelenting number of requests for an iPhone-optimized version of Engadget, we thought we'd let Apple stand by its whole "the real internet in your pocket" thing. And then we ran the numbers. We could hardly believe it.

So far in 2008, the iPhone, iPhone 3G, and iPod touch account for some 95.8% of all mobile views on the full site. We're not even kidding. That doesn't factor the visitors who hit our current mobile version of the site, but it's pretty hard to argue with any number like that, so we're rolling out a new beta version of Engadget optimized for the iPhone at i.engadget.com. (Don't worry, we'll still be keeping original mobile site active at m.engadget.com.) Please feel free to let us know what you think in comments!

Oh, and for the stats nerds in the audience, you can check out Engadget's mobile device breakdown after the break.

Top 25 mobile / non-desktop devices hitting engadget.com (Jan 1, 2008 - Aug 20, 2008)
Note: some in the top 25 have few enough views that they don't constitute 1/10th of a percent (hence 0.0%). These stats don't include m.engadget.com

1. Apple iPhone - 79.8%
2. Apple iPod Touch - 16.0%
3. Nintendo Wii - 1.1%
4. HTC P3650 (aka Touch Cruise) - 0.5%
5. Nokia N95 8GB - 0.4%
6. Nokia N95 - 0.3%
7. HTC X7500 - 0.2%
8. LG VX10000 Voyager - 0.2%
9. Nokia E90 - 0.2%
10. Nokia N82 - 0.1%
11. Nokia E51 - 0.1%
12. Nokia N95-3 NAM - 0.1%
13. Palm Treo 755p - 0.1%
14. Nokia E61 - 0.1%
15. Sony PlayStation Portable - 0.1%
16. Nokia N73 - 0.1%
17. Nokia N81 - 0.1%
18. Nokia N78 - 0.0%
19. Nokia 6120 classic - 0.0%
20. Nokia E65 - 0.0%
21. Danger Sidekick III - 0.0%
22. Motorola RAZR2 V8 - 0.0%
23. Samsung SCH-U940 - 0.0%
24. Motorola Q9 - 0.0%
25. Sony Ericsson P1i - 0.0%

[SirPasta117 @ Aug 20th 2008 1:40PM]

When reading the title i thought you were finally changing the name to iengadget.

[rock99rock @ Aug 20th 2008 1:44PM]

Hah! Nice.

[helloUser @ Aug 20th 2008 1:46PM]

Its best that they do change their name to i.engadget. This site has more news about steve jobs and apple than macrumors and appleinsider combined.

[SneAKz @ Aug 20th 2008 1:49PM]

You can get to the mobile Safari optimized version of any Weblogs Inc. page at i._____.com. Just replace the blank with the site. For example:

http://i.switched.com/
http://i.joystiq.com/
http://i.tuaw.com/



Just thought you should know.

[brn2ski00 @ Aug 20th 2008 2:02PM]

the titles of the headings needs to be smaller, I can barely see what the article is about....

[John @ Aug 20th 2008 2:09PM]

Everyone knows that the decision to make iPhone-compatible blogs was made by higher-ups at AOL, hence why every other Weblogs, Inc. blog got the same treatment. It's sad to see that this blog has slowly become yet another outlet for corporate bullshit.

[Ryan Block @ Aug 20th 2008 2:17PM]

Actually John, no. This dates way back to Engadget's redesign earlier this year, and was one of the long-term things I had slated. As it happens, just like when we rolled out the original mobile version of Engadget, from a software platform perspective doing all the other Weblogs, Inc. sites together isn't much different of a task than doing a single site.

[Ellianth @ Aug 20th 2008 2:18PM]

Can we have comments on m.engadget.com?

[jacubious @ Aug 20th 2008 2:30PM]

in reply to hellouser:

I am so sick of people saying that engagdet is apple biased. Do you remember when Bill gates was leaving? They had a ton of posts about him, so many that they needed another just to round it all up. Notice how there are enough posts about netbooks to make you sick?It's because it's a big trend at the moment. It is almost like, they give lots of coverage to big things! So it should be no surprise or indication of bias when a hugely anticipated phone is released, and covered abundantly. The fact that Apple is gaining popularity should mean that there are most posts about them than there used to be. And to release some specialized for 95.8% of your viewer base isn't an indication of fanboism either, it is just common sense. I prefer windows in most ways, but I am just sick about people crying fanboy at Engagdet.

[UnixSystemsEngineer @ Aug 20th 2008 2:42PM]

jacubious,

Yeah, but what you forget is, Apple is about the only tech company that has foaming-at-the-mouth rabid haters. It wouldn't matter if they introduced iWorldPeace for $1.99, there would be furiously angry folks having a brain hemmorrhage at anyone who dared say anything good about it.

It makes the clueless fanboys sound like Einstein.

[Ryan @ Aug 20th 2008 2:58PM]

I say either shrink the text or text-wrap, if possible....otherwise, looks great.

[gabe @ Aug 20th 2008 3:09PM]

considering all the love that engadget has over the iphone it should be renamed that way :)

anyways thank u and i welcome this customization for the iphone.

bookmarking now

:)

[nohone @ Aug 20th 2008 3:49PM]

@UnixSystemEngineer:

Are you honestly saying that there are people who are foaming at the mouth Microsoft haters? This forum has many, many people who fall into that category. Some of them were banned, some are still around who will say anything about Microsoft - one (will not mention his name - he does not deserve it) will slam anything Microsoft makes, but then had a temper-tantrum that people were saying "hey, my iPhone does not work correctly." When Microsoft announced a few years back that they were going to be at some OSS conference, there were death threats made against some of the poeple there on /. And about the time when they were doing a BillG tribute when he was leaving, some of the writers were respectful and said "Thanks for what you did", while there were some that had the childish attitude of "If you can't find anything nice to say, slam him." (Ryan was not one of them). A few years ago on News.com.com.com.com when a MS employee comitted suicide, one of the commentators (Skinny DuBaud if you were around back then) over there mocked him, saying that MS was so evil that they drove him to it. And on, and on, and on. Anybody who thinks that Apple is the only company that has rabid haters, is truly derranged.

Yes, Apple has their haters. It may sound like I am one of them based on my post history, but I really am not. I just want the products of theirs that I own to work. SOme things like how when you delete all mail it tells me I have -MaxInt unread items brings a little chuckle, but it is not a deal breaker. A web browser that crashes frequently is bad, but not going to make me throw it away. But people have real problems, like when I could only use the phone as a phone because of a problem with the headphone jack (read the Apple discussions, there are numerous reports of it), or because of error 1603, which an Apple employee told me it was my fault only to be recognized as a firmware update problem later, and many other problems (again, see the Apple discussion board). Some of the Apple fans here say "nope, it is not a problem it is your fault", then you get a lot of angry people who are tired of being slammed just for trying to use the phone as a phone.

The joke was that Microsoft could cure cancer and give it away for free, and they would still be demonized for it. Now, Apple is getting the same treatment. As you grow beyond the true, die-hard lovers, who will overlook any problem big or small, you are going to have upset customers. And they are just voicing their opinion.

[nohone @ Aug 20th 2008 4:05PM]

@UnixSystemsEngineer

"Apple is about the only tech company that has foaming-at-the-mouth rabid haters"

If you are saying that there are no foaming-at-the-mouth Microsoft haters, even more haters than Apple, then you really need to open your eyes.

[John @ Aug 20th 2008 4:10PM]

Sure, Ryan (B), but do you really think that if you were the only one asking for it, you would have gotten what you wanted? It seems to me that the "redesign" was really a re-skinning with even more AOL logos plastered all over the place. Even the dated and broken comment system remains the same inasmuch as it needs a redesign.

And, if Engadget is as in control as you say it is, why not let us all in on Engadget's long-term goals? Isn't the whole point of a blog to tear down the barrier between the writer and the reader? You all have certainly done that on occasion (for example, Peter Rojas' brilliant article about his dad; I still remember reading it), but it seems like the sense of community here is less and less prevalent as time goes on.

[Tuckers @ Aug 20th 2008 4:34PM]

There is a distinct lack of Windows Smartphones. It looks like they might be captured under IE and not under the mobile section of your statistics. Windows Smartphones have an enormous marketshare, it's impossible they they don't show up here , at least as #2 or #3.

[Jakob Peterhänsel @ Aug 20th 2008 4:29PM]

Ok, I've had the Engadget RSS feed in my Mail.app for some time now, and from 23 juli '08 till now, there have been 737 posts on the blog. The iPhone related ones are:

'iPhone' in the Subject: 31 / 737
'iPhone' in Entire Message: 39 / 737

Call that an 'iPhone only' blog one more time... gee!

[jupiterthunder @ Aug 20th 2008 5:11PM]

@Unix'

It would be just like those Apple bastards to try and put a price tag on world peace.

[StephenD @ Aug 20th 2008 6:47PM]

I'm afraid I don't like it. You can't read the whole headline, no pictures on the home page, and you have to click for every story.

Much better to go to the www.engadget.com site, zoom in on the first column, and add that as a link to your home screen. That way you can read the full article, and all the others on the page with pictures included (and most of the junk conveniently off-screen to the right).

[happy_penguin @ Aug 20th 2008 8:35PM]

I tried it out on my iPhone and it works pretty good. It may help when I have nothing but edge access and need my engadget fix.

[d @ Aug 20th 2008 8:44PM]

@stephend
agreed. I wish they had thumbnails of the pics next to each article. Or maybe an icon depending on the subject - an Apple logo for apple posts, etc. that would require a lot on the full site though.

Also, there's a flash lego on the bottom of the post. Not sure if it's an add or maybe a comment system. Probably an add. I don't know, it's just a lego.

[d @ Aug 20th 2008 8:48PM]

another feature I like (can't add this to other post. edit button. please.) is that when I go to http://www.engadget.com on my iPhone it doesn't automatically send me to http://i.engadget.com. I hate sites that do that. A designated i url is great. I use iPhone sites as Fluid menu extras for some of my favorite webapps, but when I tried to turn Facebook into one of these, it wouldn't let me.

[PRainho @ Aug 20th 2008 10:05PM]

If you have a iPhone and you can't see all the heading of the main page, simply keep your finger on the text for a few seconds and it will display a small box with the complete text.
Also, you can add a link to any address in the home screen. Just press the add button and choose Add to Home Screen. That simple!

RTFM

For those who don't have an iPhone: eat your heart out! LOL (only joking)

[Langdon Alger @ Aug 20th 2008 10:14PM]

@SirPasta117 ...

... but when you read the article in its entirety you realized they should have changed the name to "enFanboy", right? :)

[Carl Vitullo @ Aug 21st 2008 12:16AM]

Except for minor issues, it looks pretty good on a desktop too. :P

[DiZy @ Aug 21st 2008 7:55AM]

now if only they could fix m.engadget.com. It was perfect before the site upgrade. heading, picture, article. Now its just a link that links you to the full site :-( gets a bit pricey to look at a few days pages @ 5-7c/kb, few hundred kb/page

[Blake @ Aug 20th 2008 1:40PM]

Take that, iPhone nay-sayers!

[superted @ Aug 20th 2008 6:21PM]

shameless thread jack off this guy to draw ryan's attention but you know, shit comment and all...

in the UK i.engadget.com still displays the regular engadget

i love this idea btw - i use google's reader but would love this to work for me and have an icon on my home screen that isn't just the usual engadget optimisation

[Bratan @ Aug 20th 2008 1:40PM]

What? Blackberry is not even on the list? I use it to read engadget all the time :)

[Ryan Block @ Aug 20th 2008 1:46PM]

That's actually a really good question. Here's why: BB users are automatically sent to the mobile version at m.engadget.com, which doesn't feed into the full-site stats. Some BB users override that, but so few do that RIM ranks way, way down the list.

[Hush @ Aug 20th 2008 1:53PM]

You heard the man. Basically it's not an iPhone so can't help ya.

[helloUser @ Aug 20th 2008 1:53PM]

Ryan, that somehow doesnt count as engadget being browsed by a blackberry?

[Rich @ Aug 20th 2008 1:53PM]

How did you distinguish between browsers? Nokia's S60 browser reports itself to be "Safari" when fetching content.

[Eric @ Aug 20th 2008 1:54PM]

I would go on my BB if they had a decently formatted mobile page to view, but they dont, so I wait until work to check in.

[From My Cube @ Aug 20th 2008 1:55PM]

how does it account for Opera mini? I spam your page all the time from my BB

[initialxy @ Aug 20th 2008 2:19PM]

@Ryan Block, good point. I came to realized that it is possible to force engadget to display the normal page (which shows you comments) if you add "?m=false" at the end of your URL. too late to fight for the honor of BB perhaps?

[Dan @ Aug 20th 2008 3:15PM]

These stats should include any sites that are browsed by a mobile, including the BlackBerry.. I think its a lot bigger percentage than nil.

[Student Driver @ Aug 20th 2008 2:31PM]

So, what are the total mobile stats then, including all this stuff? And, how does it compare to traditional computer-based hits on the main site? I have a Dash that I use constantly, and I hit Engadget regularly with it.

[Matt @ Aug 20th 2008 2:39PM]

Ryan, could you give us combined stats for engadget.com AND m.engadget.com? I'm willing to bet that once the Blackberries are taken into account (e.g. my trusty 8700g), we will leapfrog the Wii. :-)

[UnixSystemsEngineer @ Aug 20th 2008 2:47PM]

Do any of the popular mobile devices report themselves as (say) IE 7 for Win XP just to avoid getting shafted on website content? That might throw the stats off.

[Jim @ Aug 20th 2008 7:30PM]

Totally agree with Matt & Square. Limiting the analysis to just mobile devices and showing that "nothing else even comes close" comparison is very misleading when m.engadget is excluded. To be fair, I think there should be an update to the article showing the breakout of views by platform...period...PC, Mac, m.engadget hits by BB, WM, etc., i.egadget, etc. I think that would still be very telling.

All that being said, it's good to see a population of users making heavy use out of the full engadget site are getting their own mobile space. I'll go back to m.engadget on my Treo I check a dozen times per day.

[MRCUR @ Aug 20th 2008 8:14PM]

@Sqaure & Jim

I think you guys missed the point a bit. Those "mobile devices" seen in the stats Ryan posted are from devices which get directed to the normal Engadget page, not the mobile Engadget page. I think you can then say that these devices are capable of displaying the full Engadget page decently enough that they aren't directed to the mobile page by default.

As Ryan said, Apple touts mobile Safari as giving you the "full" Internet (which is very much so the case, IMO). These other devices might not. Devices that really have a hard time with full webpages should direct to the mobile Engadget by default. Although you have a valid point Square, I don't think you're understanding where Ryan is coming from.

Mobile Safari is very capable of displaying the full Engadget, as well as other Weblogs blogs. A device like a BlackBerry might not, which is why it goes to the mobile Engadget. Apple says mobile Safari is capable of handling the "full" Internet, so it goes to the "full" Engadget page. Black Berries (at least older ones, the Bold seems to have a pretty nice browser) probably have a hard time with the "full" Engadget, so yes, IMO, they should be directed to the mobile Engadget page. I don't see anything wrong with the way Engadget is dealing with mobile devices. I personally find browsing the web with my iPhone to be a fantastic experience. I do welcome the i-series of Weblogs blogs, especially TUAW.

[Ryan Block @ Aug 20th 2008 9:49PM]

Matt, I wish I could get deeper into m.engadget.com stats, but the only stats we have to go by are the ones I presented. I don't want to discount the impact of RIM devices though, and I'd remind people that we originally rolled out m.engadget.com to cater specifically to BlackBerry, WinMo, and other mobile users whose browsers aren't fully capable of handling the full Engadget page.

[Jooseppi @ Aug 21st 2008 8:05AM]

Ryan Block,

How can you be so certain that a large portion of Nokia S60 hits aren't falling under iPhone category, as Nokias distinguish as Safari.

What if all those Nokia hits are only the visits done with Opera browsers installed in Nokias?

If you think of Nokia's global dominance in internet-capable mobile phones, these stats seem plain flawed. There has to be something wrong here. Why would Nokia users not want to visit Engadget?

[CraigJ @ Aug 20th 2008 1:40PM]

Why is the Wii a mobile device?

[Carl Vitullo @ Aug 20th 2008 1:40PM]

This is actually just generally good, a lot of devices seem to use the 480x320 now.

[Carl Vitullo @ Aug 20th 2008 1:41PM]

I think just because it's not a PC.

[Crazylink @ Aug 20th 2008 1:43PM]

I'd guess because it runs a version of Opera mini.

[bluecifer @ Aug 20th 2008 2:00PM]

Technically the chart is speaking to the data which is labeled as "Top 25 mobile / non-desktop devices" - the article just doesn't reference that second portion of the title, but it should to alleviate confusion. Let's chalk it up to bad editing, shall we?

[bluecifer @ Aug 20th 2008 2:02PM]

HUH? Why are all the replies to 'Craig J' showing up under 'Carl Vitullo'