9 replies to this topic

[earlpearl]

This problem is way above my tech capabilities and knowledge (as are most issues    ).

 

We've been setting up mobile sites for various smb's.   All of our mobile sites, like the pc versions really push for contacts, either by phone, email, or a form on the site.

 

Over the years, people have tended to rely more and more on the forms, and less on calling.

 

Just realized that on one of our latest mobile sites, the form is not working correctly.  Some forms are being delivered to the email and some aren't.   Big big big problem.

 

Need to tie into mobile developer(s) to find out how or why this is occurring.   Any thoughts or suggestions???

 

Thanks in advance.

[iamlost]

I expect you know that unless one of the general purpose checks hsppens to solve your problem that it will take someone diving into code and settings. That said some general points re- forms and email:

* is a spam filter swallowing the email?

* is the remote address blocked by ISP, host, etc.
---does the recipient's iSP/host have specific inbound email requirements?

* I'm presuming you are coding in php?
---if so, check that the mail() function is configured correctly:
1.

<?php
mail('earlpearl@example.com','Test','The mail function is not the problem!');
echo 'Mr. Watson--come here--I want to see you!';
?>

2. save code as mailtest.php
3. change 'earlpearl@example.com' to your e-mail address
4. upload mailtest.php to your server
5. open mailtest.php in your browser (http://example.com/mailtest.php)
6. check your inbox to see if the test message arrived.

---> YES!, test message is received:
1. rerun with problematic form recipient address in place of yours.
2. recheck form script for recipient email address misspelling, etc.
3. re-re-check spam filters and remote ISP/Host email requirements.

---> NO! test message NOT received:
1. you have a php mail() configuration problem.
2. ask your host if they are imposing email sending limits or other restrictions.

 

Final note: email can sometimes not go as quickly as one might like with some hosts, occasionally taking several hours.

Really final note: have you looked into whether there is a mobile service provider in common with the lost emails? Each one has their own weird and wonderful likes and dislikes.

[earlpearl]

I'm behind the 8 ball on this issue.  The mobile site was contracted out by our on-site manager on that business.

 

EMAILs have been going into spam filters.!!!!!!!!    Ughhhhhhhhhh.    lotta leads lost.   Now we'll have to get back to coding and providers.  Not sure on providers yet.  

 

On a different level analytics were never set up with this provider.   IamLost, are there weblogs associated with mobile?  I would assume so.   We'll have to go into the logs to check on providers...but the smb site gets visitors, leads and customers from basically 2 states, and so many different devices, let alone consumers, I'm assuming there are many providers.

[iamlost]

Not sure what you mean by 'weblogs' in comment context above: do you mean identifying mobile users in amongst all the user-agents in a site's log files?

If that is correct, the answer is: it's not easy, as there are a great many mobile device user-agents BUT no simple standard method of differentiating mobile from non-mobile user-agents.
Note: if one also logs media queries (if used to deliver CSS) the screen size identification can work well.

If not, or for additional breakout, parse for:
* Android, Blackberry, Windows CE, Fennec, IEMobile, iPad, iPhone, iPod, Palm, Nokia, SEMC, Symbian,  etc.
* Mobi (which should pick up both mobile and mobi (used by Opera)) and Mini (Opera).

You can actually get quite a lot of awesome personalisation data from mobile users if you 'ask' the right questions and 'listen' the right way.
 

[earlpearl]

IamLost:  I meant the log files for the mobile site.  I assume there are log files.  

 

and as to getting a lot of personalization from mobile users....I'm beginning to learn and experience this with existing sites.  Thanks for your comments.  Illuminating.

[EGOL]

*off topic*   Quite a while ago I was working on some educational activities that students would do as homework.  I wanted them to be housed on a server so I could edit them at will and improve them continuously - the interactivity would be done by perl scripts on the server using only radio buttons, checkboxes and clickable image maps.  The textbook would have a pocket in the cover with an access card that would give the buyer access for a semester.    The publisher wanted them on a CD in the pocket so that they could be sold like physical goods.   They went with the CD and it was a huge briar patch.  Huge.   Lots of different browsers.  Lots of browser versions.  Lots of operating systems.  Lots of computer brands.  And lots of institutions block the use of executable files on campus.

 

The lesson... do the execution server side instead of client side.   Less briar patches.  */off topic*

[fisicx]

Earelpearl, I've got to ask the question: why have a mobile site at all.

 

Don't even use the word 'mobile'.

 

My laptop is mobile and has a 1280px screen resolution. My PC isn't mobile and only has an old clunky 1024px screen.  A fully responsive site will adapt to all screen resolutions making your mobile site redundant.

Edited by fisicx, 04 February 2013 - 07:51 AM.

[iamlost]

I had stayed away from questioning why a separate mobile site because there actually are some valid business reasons, usually to do with the desktop site. However, as fisicx raised it I'll just add a couple of side notes to responsive sites:

Note: my sites are responsive with server side elements.

* many third party ad networks, including AdSense, do not play well with responsive sites.

Note: AdSense has said they are working on the problem and expect a solution later this year.

 

* there can be, i.e. iPad Mini, a problem vis-à-vis resolution and viewport size that needs to be considered.

 

However, responsive design, whole or modified, appears a solid best practice at the moment and looking to the near future.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[earlpearl]

I am admittedly weak technologically and far stronger from a business perspective.

 

We went into mobile sites with little study admittedly.  We have a group of smb's under a loose ownership management control with various operators having more significant independence.

 

I do have to go back through our experiences.   

 

Ultimately for all the businesses as they relate to their websites, we create a presence, have pretty good or better search visibility, and we use various web and non web methods for marketing.  They are all local, in different markets.   They are of more than one type and have a variety of types of customer demographics to which they appeal.

 

We have two mobile experiences so far with decidedly different results and I have to look into this in greater depth.

 

As far as we are concerned one mobile site is working well.  Our major determinant on that is in terms of total leads or contacts.   From a  strict business sense the smb's and that business depend on very large numbers of leads, and then very responsive follow up to effect sales.

 

One business, as small as it is, and within a tiny niche has a long history and an excellent reputation for what it is.  

 

We had a mobile site developed on an independent host platform.  It was expensive, done in a bit of haste with not too much study or review beforehand.

 

In our terms it is working.  The mobile site is generating a lot of leads.  Lots.   Engagement on the mobile site is dramatically weak relative to the main site/pc site.   Engagement is little more than 1 page.  It is generating a large number of form leads off the site.  The percentages of leads versus total traffic is HIGH, higher than the main site or at least comparable.   This smb does not do a great job of in depth tracking off of phone calls, which also generate a lot of leads....but to the extent we are doing it we are getting a large number of calls off of viewing of the mobile site.

 

On our second mobile site we are having significant problems.  We just put it down for a test period.

 

The site was developed relatively inexpensively using one of the better known mobile site developer groups.  They built the site on their own platform.   I've been getting this second hand to date, and need to be more involved and will be shortly.

 

As I understand this issue, we are restricted in adding code to analytics and/or salesforce which the business uses extensively.   Not good for us.

 

Earlier I discovered that the lead function of this second mobile site wasn't working correctly.   The first problem was simply that many of the leads were being sent via email to the smb and landing in the spam box.  Simple issue, simple correction.

 

But the problems have been bigger.  The site seems to load slowly and in using some mobile devices while clicking on internal links we were losing the site on the mobile.

 

But the enormous problem is that lead volume plummeted.  I've reviewed that extensively.   It appears we aren't getting squat off of mobile visitors to the website since the conversion to the mobile site  (tablet users land on the main site).   

 

Leads have plummeted based on any objective analysis.   And that is a enormous issue.  We can clearly sell better or worse, but when lead volume is dramatically lower we will do worse.   I can't find any other easily apparent reason for such a drop at least off of analytics, adwords stats, and the types of calls we are getting.   But the mobile side of the coin has obviously been doing poorly.

 

So for the time being we dropped the mobile site for at least a week or 2 or 3 just to check activity on that basis.

 

This business does receive a constant and vast majority of new customers, new searchers all the time.   I'm not worried about having a mobile site and not having it.  Also, of interest is that a critical and vital element of its first page and its essential "call to action" on the main site still shows reasonably well from the main site on a mobile.   The underlying message is all there.

 

Guess its time to become mobile smart.

 

As for me and these particular issues I guess the jury is still out for us as to mobile or not.   TBD.

[earlpearl]

More on mobile site development

 

Our local firm hired a mobile development firm named fiddlefly.com.   Evidently fairly big.  I was way too out of the loop on this one, I believe.  I think he checked references but not sure.

 

fiddlefly has a diy option.   Our operator hired a fiddlefly designer to design the site.  fiddlefly's platform means they host the site and you are building off their platform.

 

I haven't yet talked w/ fiddlefly.  There apparently are some quirks there.  I think, if they use any sort of analytics at all, they haven't sent anything to our operator nor told him how to access their data.

 

We have no idea what traffic was to the mobile site in the last 7 weeks.  It doesn't look like you set up analytics to report directly to you, but rather through fiddlefly.   

 

Also we like to add code to the site to have forms go directly into a salesforce source we use.   We love salesforce.   Evidently this is difficult or a problem w/ fiddlefly, the full extent of which I don't fully grasp yet....but they have problems with outside code of some sorts.

 

BIG PROBLEM!!!!

 

so we still don't know all the issues, BUT...we dropped the mobile site for the time being.   After one day we saw that mobile (mobile and tablet) traffic to the site was 30% + of total traffic 

 

PLUS we got a lot of leads yesterday....60% higher than our daily average over the last 7 weeks.   

 

After 2 examples getting mobile sites developed one thing I'm quesy about is that mobile developers in my experience don't think analytics or outside elements with similar code for the mobile sites.  

 

 

My gut is the site loaded poorly or when clicking on internal links kept messing up.   Very unhappy with results.