Responsive Layouts, Mobile Templates, Native Apps And Universal UI.

Andrew Boon posted 8th of April 2013 in News. 49 comments.

Dolphin is getting more attention from the perspective of multi-device compatibility. We have been looking for the best way to make Dolphin more "adaptable" for quite a while, but it seems that there is still no definite consensus on what has to be done. Moreover, the new solutions designed to tackle the problem seem to only bring more confusion. After a lot of research, comparison, talks and reflection we'd like to share our opinion and perhaps spur a constructive discussion on the topic. Let's try...


The Need

Internet browsing is changing rapidly. Smartphones and tablets accelerated mobile browsing to such pace that social networks started reporting more mobile traffic than desktop traffic. Some services are getting designed for "mobile first" or even "mobile only". So, it's not the 2005 anymore, when developers could shake off mobile as a "thing of distant future" and come up with half-baked options. We have, effectively, entered the age of mobile web.



Interestingly, Internet used to be very mobile-friendly. The very first versions of web markup - HTML assumed flexible page layout, web fonts controlled by browsers and content structured as article-like pages. It would work wonderfully on modern mobile browsers and desktop browsers without any change.

Unfortunately, we had some odd 20 years of various display sizes, resolutions, browsers and OSs with developers trying to make things look beautiful, adapt and utilize space effectively. Tables, CSS, Ajax, DHTML, blah blah blah - these things complicated web markup to such extent that we now have to "retrofit" our page elements to look more like what they would look like 20 years ago - because we have small screens, "white-space" is in fashion and pixels become too small to worry about. 


Option 1 - Mobile Version / Mobile Template

This one is really interesting - in effect it's the same old "solution" that was tried and constantly failed for more than a decade. Remember "WAP versions"? Remember ".mobi" for mobile-sites? This is a classic example of "assumed demand" when developers got so disconnected from real-world use-cases that they (ok, we) started to believe that the world needs a stripped down version of the site to be able to use it on mobile devices. At first, it was justified by slow and costly mobile Internet connection, and later by smaller screens and shorter attention-span. Either way, mobile versions never proved to be effective. I keep asking friends and relatives - they all hate them! First thing users tend to do is look for the "full version" link. There is a good reason why...

Mobile version of a website always brakes some of the most fundamental rules of UI design usability.

To wit - Jakob Nielsen: 10 Usability Heuristics for User Interface Design:

Consistency and standards
Users should not have to wonder whether different words, situations, or actions mean the same thing. Follow platform conventions.

Recognition rather than recall
Minimize the user's memory load by making objects, actions, and options visible. The user should not have to remember information from one part of the dialogue to another. Instructions for use of the system should be visible or easily retrievable whenever appropriate.

See, it's hard enough for most people to learn how to use one version of your site, and if they come from mobile device and see a dramatically different layout - you've lost them. They can't "muddle through" their tried'n'true use-paths and have to re-learn. Menus are repositioned, blocks are in different places, some parts are gone, some features are seemingly (or actually) absent. It's a mess. 


Remember the first iPhone presentation by Steve Jobs? The whole point of new generation of smartphones was about displaying FULL web on a small screen. Pinch-to-zoom, double-tap to zoom and orientation change were designed for FULL web pages. 


Bottom line is that mobile and desktop versions should be same, or very similar to preserve consistent user experience. Otherwise, it's just not worth it - let people zoom and enjoy the feeling of actually understanding what they're doing.

Option 2 - Responsive Layout 

The most recent twist on the same old idea - responsive layout frameworks like Bootstrap and Foundation look rather sexy. In theory they're supposed to intelligently reposition page elements to suit any screen size - phone, tablet or desktop. Unlike the ancient one-page HTML markup, however, they work with complex layouts that contain menus, multiple columns, adaptable images, etc. 


And again, all of that wizardly only creates the same trap - webmasters get all worked up thinking that we've got a saviour, while users get frustrated every time they can't find a familiar "red button in the top right corner" or something like that. Even when you look at the websites of the responsive frameworks developers you can get lost, unless you're savvy enough to assume that.. top menu converts into a button, blocks jump lower down, side menu is now top or bottom menu, etc. It's a whole new science for science's sake.


Responsive is good, but only if doesn't create too much dissimilarity. Check out the resposiveness of or NNGroup - browser resizing triggers display of small or large versions, but they're almost identical. They also look the same on tablets and mobiles. And that's a good thing, alright!


Option 3 - Native Mobile Apps

A new kid in town. Everyone knows that Apps are not sites and they have their own usability conventions. Just that premise already created a foundation for native apps success - people accept that apps are not websites, they know it and they go back to a website when app fails to deliver. This is why most of the Facebook's "mobile users" are in fact mobile apps users. 


Native apps can be designed to make good use of the hardware-specific features, they're normally faster and more efficient at what they can do. On the other hand, development of rich functionality for different OSs in native app form is costly and time-consuming. Developers just can't commit enough resources to every app to make it do everything a website does. Luckily  this only reinforces the first point - people know that apps are for quick access to features that need to be accessed quickly. For everything else - there's a full website.


Ok, this is pretty much what we're do doing with Dolphin - we have a full-blown web platform and native mobile apps for iPhone and Android. Our apps don't do everything, but they are extensible, Prime clients can access and modify the source code, and updates come our regularly with great improvements. With current state of affairs this seems to be the best way to tackle mobile. Oh, and there's one more thing...


Option 4 - Universal UI

The idea of Universal UI is to make just one layout that is consistent across all devices, but is still very usable both on small and large screens. This is not about some sort of CSS wizardry or fancy repositioning - it's just a methodology of building web-pages for "grandmoms". Think large page elements, bigger fonts, single-column-pages, short menus, scalable icons, etc. iPad is a good reference device for Universal UI for non-tech-savvy end users. Things that look good on iPad would work great on desktop (less clutter = better usability), and would still be usable on on smartphones with a bit of zooming, when needed. 


Universal UI is what we're working towards when developing Dolphin.


Our Choice  

Option 3 + Option 4 - Universal UI and Native Mobile Apps, and we're quite confident about this being the right choice.

Opinions? Suggestions? Comments?

Recommended by
Please login to post a comment.
good and right choise!
Dolphin : Computer/Mobile/TV

yes, dolphin and mobile doplhin "fusion", there to more mobile users.
  Will require for the new version application all in one "computer - mobile - TV"
leading to Option 4, standard for all devices should be the way to go...
Hmmm......I'll take both thanks. this case ALL 4
for me the best is Option 3 + Option 4 ( facebook and google+ does not have a template responsive there will be a reason, if they thought that responsive was the best way for user, this social networks have all the money and resources to get the template responsive, but not have done it. ) but this is just my opinion.
Andrew Boon
Yes, good point. Facebook, Google+ and most large sites like Apple don't use responsive layout. Well, FB and G+ have something like "supplemental" layout where they display an extra Chat or Ticket blocks when there's enough space, but that's different. They still don't alter their main page layout.

Interestingly, MIcrosoft's homepage is now responsive, but in typical MS style it's the only page that's responsive - click on "Windows" and you get hard-sized full page, making see more responsive homepage as silly as it can get. Kind of remind me of their slap-on way to introduce metro on top of standard Windows interface. As Master Yoda used to say "do or do not, there's no try". MS is no Jedi.
Not sure everyone would agree with you re: apple:

Also, Apple, via their developer site, has documentation that encourages developers to make adjustments that allow for more optimal viewing on an iOS device, effectively, responsive design. I would quote various documents but I fear the Apple NDS attorneys would be all over me, and know that you have access to them anyway.

But to be honest, I think Apple essentially see more has a philosophy of non-responsive design tied to a number of edicts like "no Flash", "no WAP", "no 7 inch screens"...
Well facebook and google was never much user friendly - it took years to them to even offer localization to czech language and even its now localized translation isnt good and contains alot of erors, mispellings and grammatically wrong sentences - so I think they more just dont care too much than they didnt released responsive by an pourpose..
I agree, also you must consider the display limitations of the smartphones.
One of the biggest problems I deal with is supporting iOS and Android devices together. It's pretty easy to support iOS but Android uses file structure and 4-5 different file sizes for it's multiple resolution/screen size devices.

I would really really like to see a builder on the administration panel that would allow you to create redirect pages specific to device with configurable setup options by page for the device manufacturer, for screen size/resolution, OS, and a couple other options. see more It would also make sense to have image loaders that when sequenced could scrape the page and if say a @2x image exists for supporting retina devices then it would create what it can for Android and create the appropriate folder hierarchy and file names. The same method already exists in terms of profile images/thumbnails/original image. It would just be up to admins to support higher resolution images from the beginning.

The reality is that as these higher resolution devices become more prevalent then need for supporting them will become mandatory and a way a managing all the different devices via the administration panel would far out way the ability to manage a single app product. It just opens up the possibilities of having your whole site or at least a reasonably majority of it available on as many devices you wish to support.

Of course you could include a general redirect that would grab say all smart phone or all tablets but you really need to consider adding multiple device support as a native tool for Dolphin.

I dislike Apps... why build different codes for different OS? Moreover, their strict policies sucks. I prefer the web version which is single for all browsers.
"More people use Facebook on mobile web than Android/iPhone app." - Mark Zuckerberg
Universal UI is an ideal for tablet to 27" iMac/Thunderbolt Display/television. The phone version still needs mobile template.
Look at Facebook... automatically for phones while normal site for tablets and bigger.
Andrew Boon
Also from Zuck: "On iOS and Android you can just do so much better by doing native work and we needed to do that.", when admitting that their focus on web-app was a major mistake. A lot of people go to mobile site, but not because they want the mobile app experience - many just don't know any other way (native apps), or they want features of full site they're used to (and have to deal with mobile version instead), or they are dissatisfied with native app for some reason (FB for iOS used see more to be really bad). It's a tricky and a very political subject - mind you, Zuck doesn't want iOS to succeed. Now that they have Facebook HOME, which is "native", you're going to hear how much better it is and how much more engaging, and many more people use it compared to browser version.

There is no hard evidence for either, so we try to go by hunch and feedback from real people we know. So far - native app + universal site feel like winners.
If you're not going to build mobile template. Then, at least, help us or do something about adult sites for the native apps.
From what I have seen, Zuckerman will say whatever he has to if it means Facebook can get an advantage over competitors. Misdirection seems to be a standard business practice there.
Feedback from real people, is so overstatement because there was never mobile template from Boonex to begin with (I'm not talking about third-party). I still think mobile template is also a winner. I have evidence, this is VERY do-able.
Check out the demo
This looks similar to native app that people are used to. This may be useful for tablets as well especially portrait. Please reconsider mobile template for some sites that will never see more be approved by app store.
Now that I am over 50, the one single factor that keeps me from returning to web sites is the use of tiny typefaces for the bulk of the site content. In some cases, the 'designers' have chosen to make it difficult or impossible to zoom the text even if you want to. The best sites are those that have a type size adjuster right at the top of the page, where it's easy to adjust and find.

I hope you include such a feature in Dolphin.
Two more notes on this:

In the US, all governmental web sites are required to be designed to accommodate vision-disabled persons. Note that this does not mean only person who have no vision at all. All types of vision impairment are considered disability for the purposes of this regulation. Also, any government vendor agrees to the FAR's, which would generally mean that any site that is of a company receiving government funding or doing business with the government must follow the same regulations.

So, see more you asked Option 1,2,3 or 4. Accommodation is easily done with Option 3 for browsers and can be done in the template. I'd like to see that added to the Dolphin-supplied templates.

As for the other options. I would think that this goes beyond a simple mobile vs. desktop paradigm. Everything from kitchen appliances to televisions are being net-connected these days, mostly using Android (vs. IOS). Apps are appropriate for these devices. Many people do not ever launch a browser to type a URL in the box. Even if the 'app' is simply a bookmark which tells the browser to go to a site, people are getting accustomed to downloading the app for the things they want to see and just clicking. Option 4 makes sense here.

I may consider this a big pain in the behind vs. just typing in the URL or clicking a bookmark, but tell that to someone who wants to check your site from their refrigerator door! Like it or not, you must have apps and that means creating them for each type of device or OS.

The catch for me is that my site is for a small charitable organization that has a $0 budget. This means that I donate my time and any software necessary. So, what I'm finding is that I keep hitting my head on the licence restrictions because I can't buy Prime to give to them (or, mostly the add-ons they need).

The Catch-22 in this is that the site, by its nature, attracts a lot of people who are not at all computer literate and often using the cheapest, simplest devices to access it. These days, that means Android devices and small screens. I have yet to find a good way to serve this population with the free version.
Oops! I got my 3 & 4 backwards.
Option 4 for me is the most important, and indeed it is the only option for users actule Windows Phone and Windows 8 tablet, is not a clear sign of Andrew? Or maybe you do not believe in this OS and you decided not to muck around you?
Guys, I'm afraid you're in a mind-frozen state here, so let me challenge the assumptions.
Option 1 of mobile version was disregarded based on what again? "I keep asking friends and relatives - they all hate them!" hm, that's a very logical reasoning. The mobile versions are not always done in the way I'd like them to be, but browsing a desktop website on a phone is much worse. If you ask your question: "Do you love the mobile version of this website?" the answer of course would see more be "no", since there're usually some limitations. However, try asking them - what would you prefer to browse on your phone if you had to do the most basic task - the desktop or the mobile version? The answer, I'm pretty sure, would be "of course the mobile version!".
Now I kind of get the reason behind boonex's lack of interest in the mobile version. They sell the app for $800. Why on Earth would they cannibalize that revenue?
BTW, if you're already looking at what Facebook and Google do (and so do, wallmart, ebay, amazon, etc) of course they have the "m." version! It's plain immature and unprofessional to not have one.
What do I think when I get to a desktop version of a website on my phone? I think "either the guys are still living in the stone age, or they don't have the money to develop the mobile version".
Another quick reason agains Option 3 - most of the people are not advanced users. They don't even know how to download an app. Moreover, why SHOULD I download anything to my precious phone before I try the website? I would always go the website and check it out first to see whether it's something that I would use on such a frequent basis that would justify polluting my phone screen with yet another icon. I go to the website and - holy shit, it's fugly! I don't want to download that app now even if I considered it previously.
Regarding option 4 - why do you want to sacrifice the elegancy of the design that can be achieved if optimized for the right screen size? Anything that is not optimized would be uglier. The desktop version would be ugly AND the mobile version would be ugly. It's like if you need to come up with a product that would fit both - short people and tall people. You make a product that would fit the average height. Congratulations, now everybody hate your product - it doesn't fit the shorties and it doesn't fit the tallies.
I have to disagree with you. People who use smartphones not only know what an app is but also know how to add one. Even my 87 year old mom with her Kindle knows how to do this.

I would suggest moving the links to the mobile apps to a prominent position on the site and using the App-store's logo, which people recognize and will click if they see it (this assumes that you have Prime and can adapt the apps to your site).
Why disagree? Tell me, can we submit adult sites to Apps? The answer is obviously. Please include mobile template.
In responsive template u really can get sometimes a lost for a few moment as u have to adopt different positions of some things because they are not same as if u looked at same web from desktop computer for example. Anyway I have long experience with joomla where u now can basicly get only responsive templates ( other are unsellable now) I have to say Imm pretty comfortable with responsive templates based on Twitter Bootstrap framework. I tested with many users and even had a poll on that theme. see more over 80 % of people preffered responsive theme against mobile wap versions or html variants of same site - site is a bit different but not that much. Unioversal option seems interesting - depends how u guys take that concept... AM curious ... :-)
Goodbye Dolphin, I hardly knew ya; and that is the truth. You might as well scrap blogs, forum, any chat system, in fact, turn it into a tweeter clone so that people can use their restrictive mobile devices to say, "I am having soup for lunch". As the world gets dumber and dumber; yes, this the way of the future. Oh, and they do it while driving with one hand and looking at their mobile device in the other hand. What stinking traffic light; I did not see a traffic light on my mobile see more device.
We actually agree on something. I finally suspended my FB account. I found the excessive "check ins" really annoying. I don't mind if someone checks in at the Rainbow Hilton @ Waikiki, but I really don't give a shit if they're in line at Taco Bell, or that they paid too much for their pickles.

The world is indeed getting dumber. Chat rooms and text messaging are a great contributor to the dumbass epidemic in this country. I can always tell when someone acquired the sum of their see more linguistic skills in a chat room, or via sms. Everybody wants to design their user interface so even the dumbest person on earth can use it. As the old saying goes, Build a system that even a fool can use, and only a fool will want to use it.
I have deleted my account on Facebook last month. And, today, I contacted Skype representative to delete my account. It's possible that I may leave Boonex if they don't include mobile template module.
I just watched a great example of how dumb people are getting. A reporter was interviewing witnesses at an apartment fire, and one of them said when he first noticed the fire, he took his phone out and started filming. Personally, I'd have called 911 and reported the fire. I don't know if 'dumb' is the right word. What do you call someone who places a higher value on filming someone's residence being destroyed by fire, than making a potentially life saving phone call?
Universal UI... yeah right. Sounds like you want to be like Windows 8, which in my opinion sucks beyond belief on non-touchscreen computer. Keyboards and mouses aren't going away anytime soon. I recently bought a 3000 laptop with windows 8, but it didn't have a tough screen. While a Windows 8 UI may be great for tablets and smaller devices with a touch screen, it's really awkward on a mouse/KB interface. It sucked so bad, I returned the $3K laptop the very same day. I'm calling bullshit on see more your less clutter = better usability claim. It simply isn't true. I don't know exactly what you have in mind, but maybe you should give it more thought.
Who the hell wants to use Universal UI on phones. Nobody likes zooming constantly.
I think I had a lot more respect for the people running Boonex before this post. So let me get this straight: Boonex Dolphin is an "open source" application intended to encourage outside contributions and the company that provides paid supported versions is saying "we don't like your solutions to making dolphin usable on a non-desktop screen, we want to make a watered down, chiclet button interface that looks the same on a 4 inch, 320x480 smartphone screen, used by a guy with big see more fat fingers, as it does on a 30 inch, 4k monitor used by someone with a mouse? Someone using a flexible wrist display or one embedded in glasses? Finger, pointer or voice input? Why be limited to a one size fits all solution?

I don't know about you but I find that a site that adapts to my smart phone is far less disconcerting than having to pinch, scroll and unpinch to get anything basic done navigating a non-responsive website and I'll wager that if the mobile browser had come first, screens that are 4 or 5 inches at best, there is no way we would be looking at web pages that look like what the website currently looks like when viewed on an iphone. Could you imagine if there was a rule that all printed material had to use the exact same font and be designed the same--same number of columns, same numbers of words across a column, and same number of lines on a page, regardless of the size of the printed material or its intended audience? What good does that do anybody? I've got three recommendations:

1) Don't kill the valuable work that people attempting to come up with solutions to this issue are doing by not supporting their efforts. Recognize that their attempts are potentially thwarted by an implementation that could not forsee the explosion of cheap, portable, universally connected computers that we call smartphones or their big cousins, tablets.

2) Before you get the boonex environment to work on smaller/bigger screens. Get the dolphin administration functionality, or at least most of it, to work. Go to with an iphone and try to log in with an administrative account. Here are the problems I run into:
a) login popup is not pinch friendly. It slides off the screen before it gets to a size where I can read the characters and submit button.
b) the member menu is not pinch friendly. By default the items on it are far too small for even my little finger to click on, but when pinched to enlarge, the whole right side of the menu disappears.
c) page builder functionality doesn't work or at least, I can't figure out how to move, add or delete blocks from a page with my iphone. I can't tell you how frustrating it has been trying to convice my business user that I can't make a simple change because I only have access to an iphone or ipad at the moment. Get things set up so that you feel comfortable managing a boonex site from a phone or tablet and I think you will learn a lot in the process.

3) It might be better to talk about the pros and cons of each of the four approaches you have outlined. I really don't think there is one universal, single solution that is best in all cases. For example, apps are good for the reasons you stated but an Apple app is a non-starter for anyone with a business or content that Apple will not approve for the App Store. Another problem with the Boonex Mobile Apps is that they don't support some of the core Dolphin functionality, like Events, Forums, Groups, Timeline/Wall, etc. Responsive design might simply be hard to make work reliably or lack standards for implementation but I would take it in a heartbeat over any of the other options because I know that it would provide the best experience for our users. A more functional app would be a close second. A Universal UI might be okay on a phone or TV but becomes limiting for other devices. But on the other hand a UUI doesn't prevent someone from implementing a responsive design around it, so what is it really? Universial UI or Responsive?
Have to say, not the best blog post I've seen written here... kinda more of a statement of position than asking for opinions, suggestions, comments...

Seems all but most comments from boonex towards the mobile 'issue' are to give reasons why we should totally disregard responsive templates and stick with the apparently great mobile app as the way forwards!
To compare responsive to WAP also... really???
IF in 2 years, everyone has woken up and realised that responsive templates are a waste of see more time then I will eat my boonex hat :-)
The example you give of being 'responsive' is not great. Ok, so it will re-scale 'to a point'. Lets try linking to the forums page now on my smart phone... wait a mo, best get the magnifying glass first.

IF you are building a site with mobile in mind, when using a responsive layout, you build it in a way so it does not differ so much on different devices anyway. Unless of course you have no idea of site layout in the first place.

Dolphin - is a template / CMS itself for those who wish to build their own network based sites. It's biggest sales point so far as Im concerned is that is is highly adaptive. Mostly due to the extensive community plugins that are a major life blood to the whole thing.
YET - these are not supported in the mobile app...
What point is a mobile app if it does not reflect the site more than say 10%!
Why complain about responsive templates 'moving things around' when the mobile app doesn't offer 'things' in the first place!
Think I would prefer the responsive yet functional version here!

As for using facebook and google as examples that have not chosen responsive templates, well that because they have mobile apps THAT WORK. They do what the sites do... and are also incredibly linked up to other functions built into smart phones!

Hardly the same kettle of fish as Dolphin mobile right now...

So, I guess after this anti rant - rant, my choice would be a combination.
1 - Give us a good mobile app that supports 3rd party modules easily and actually reflects the full set of site functions.
2 - Then give us responsive templates. It's not that difficult, AndrewP put a couple together within days of the big 'responsive' debate starting on the forums and I have to say, they work great.

Universal... well I have to wait to see exactly how that will work before commenting, right now it seems to be as far away as Dolphin 8 probably is.

Till the mobile app improves massively, responsive is currently the best option for Dolphin by a long way.
i vote for Responsive... hands down the future
for me Option 3 + Option 4 - Universal UI and Native Mobile Apps is the best, responsive is fine for a blog site as wordpress not for a social network, for me must be only improved the mobile application to make it more adaptable to the third-party modules.
if the future was responsive why facebook, google+ and all the other social networks with billion dollar of revenue did not invest in this technology? the future for me are the Native Mobile Apps, where these social networks that have hundreds see more of developer and do surveys every day are investing.
facebook, google opted for mobile app development but because they could do it properly. They had closed platforms where every user had the same experience, no varying apps, modules, purposes between each and every user. Of course a dedicated mobile app in that case is going to be better if developed properly. for Dolphin however, it will be impossible for a mobile app to offer the same experience for each and every user as its designed to be customisable. Every Dolphin site is completely different. see more

Dolphin cannot be compared to facebook, google+ as its not anything like them.
It should be compared to Wordpress, Joomla etc as it is a CMS but 'focused' more on network (WP and joomla both have a number of social network themes and plugins that turn them into something very similar to dolphin...).
Wordpress and Joomla both have shifted towards responsive templates...
I remain by my opinion, Option 3 + Option 4..
Wordpress and Joomla both have shifted towards responsive templates but is a simple blog, if you use it as a social network are really poor, otherwise you would use this instead of being here on boonex, Wordpress and Joomla have much less functions for social network, and for me some third-party modules of Boonex is would adapt bad to responsive, and templates responsive of Wordpress and Joomla are not very suitable at 100% for their respective modules see more for social network, in more I see that on Boonex market there are developers who adapt any third-party module on the mobile app so I think it should not be impossible, only Boonex should be make this integration more simple.
not quite true. Ive been working with WP for social networking and can do pretty much everything D can do. You just have to use a few plugins to get the same features as D has integrated. There are also responsive social networking themes for WP that already do all the key functions of D, plus you have thousands of FREE plugins to use on top!
Your experience of them may have been 'really poor' but thats far from my experience, maybe you just didnt have the right themes/plugins.
Dolphin app is see more very limited need massive improvement to make it fully functional. Responsive kinda fixes this in a flash... dont get why people seem to be against the idea!???
We have implemented RESPONSIVE design with BOOTSTRAP framework for Dolphin 7.1.1
Demo URL:
Will be open to Boonex Marketplace on Monday for FREE. Please let me know your feedback
FANTASTIC! Thank you!!!
you are most welcome, bro :)
That is a very nice template. Thanks for making it free. I think we will be using it on the charity site I am building.
You are most welcome, we are also designing a free template for charity. Will be available in the market soon.
Fantastic theme, very good implementation of the responsive concept. Frankly, I'd like to have the exact same theme as the default Boonex one - but responsive.
How about "layout-land" for Android and 4 icons for landscape?
Would be cool to see a more features in the app :)
Would be good if the mobile app can make use of GPS feature on modern smart phones.
i like Responsive Layout
I have an idea? How about making the app more useful by adding more functionality while you talk more about what you might do, possibly some time in the future? You can't see events for example and replying to emails doesn't even use the subject heading of the email you're replying to, and that's just for starters.

Facebook might not be everyone's favourite site but they do have a great app which rivals using the main site on a PC or Mac. The Dolphin app is I am sorry to say, not very useful as see more it is.

You guys are missing the boat and we unfortunately are your passengers. So many people are crying out for mobile friendly options but we can't supply it to them because you can't.

Please please please sort it out............somehow!!!!
We (Praveen did it) integreated the phpbb3 Forum into our boonex community.
Because of the Forum is the most used part in the community. It would be absolute important to have the Forum integrated into the mobile app.
Below is the legacy version of the Boonex site, maintained for Dolphin.Pro 7.x support.
The new Dolphin solution is powered by UNA Community Management System.