Re: Jolla User Experience Thread
 

The only trouble with ryanair are the passengers who want the moon on a stick for £17.99!

Re: Jolla User Experience Thread
 

Haha. Very funny. FYI, there are destinations where nothing else flies, at least not directly. There are occasions when I would rather pay £150 for an uncomfortable return flight than £400 for a comfortable one way. And there are other websites that do not work in the Sailfish browser, not just Ryanair.

Re: Jolla User Experience Thread
 

In case you have a choice, I've found Wizzair to be more enjoyable than Ryanair as far as low cost companies are concerned, for even better prices (of course, this likely depends a lot on the routes as well).

Re: Jolla User Experience Thread
 

To be fair, at one point you couldn't book a flight with Ryanair with Safari on a Mac. Their site sucked donkey balls.

... Not that us Mac users would stoop to flying budget of course. :D

Re: Jolla User Experience Thread
 

Speak for yourself, my Mac brethren. I once flew in the back of a cargo plane from Ankara to Cairo... all to save some money.

At the end of the day, I think we all can point out an expected convenience that was somehow met with some usability shortcomings due to technical limitations at that time.

Sadly I've run into many of those via the Jolla browser. Most would never be considered or visited by many on this site. But those grievances exist regardless and are not fun whenever encountered.

Re: Jolla User Experience Thread
 

The Ryanair Android app works fine on Jolla.
I used it many times and it's better than mobile website.

Cheers.

Re: Jolla User Experience Thread
 

That may be the case but, not having Android, I would never have known if you haven't told me ;)

Re: Jolla User Experience Thread
 

You know, this Ryanair thing leads me to a question: is the problem here really the Jolla browser, or the Ryanair website? Creating a website that works on a broad range of web browsers is not rocket science: you simply adhere to the published W3C standards.

Problem is, nobody ever adheres to the standards. For some reason, big companies always produce pages that depend on features specific to Microsoft's browser, or Google's browser, or use some goofy plugin. There's always a race to add dependencies on the newest, least-supported, and most broken features as well. It kinda drives me nuts...

Re: Jolla User Experience Thread
 

I'd say both are the culprit. Adhering to W3C standards doesn't mean that the browser will render it correctly *cough*IE6, 7, 8 or 9*cough* - and that makes for a rather limited site.

Amen brother.

Or their interpretation of JavaScript.

Other end of the spectrum, folks that want an utterly bland ****ing Internet with websites that are nothing but text and actually increase cognitive load and induce choice paralysis due to everything being structured as an engineer would like it, but not the layman.

There's a fine mix to be found; the people are just yelling for radically different things. In the least, the websites should gracefully degrade to something that works for the minimum. Somehow that's rarely the case as well.

Oh well... this indecision keeps me busy and employed.

Re: Jolla User Experience Thread
 

As gerbic says, probably a bit of both. The site is very heavy on JavaScript, with a change in one selection box, e.g. the country, resulting in an instant update of the selection options in another, e.g. the airport. I have not checked how compliant it is but it works in every desktop browser I have thrown at it. Jolla tries but loses breath, the poor thing.