Consumed => “Designing for Multiple Screen Sizes Is About Consistency” by Nick Bilton on NY Times.

http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/20/designing-for-multiple-screens-is-about-consistency

=> My value add (i.e., left a comment)…

Re: “Apple has been doing this in recent years, too. The user interface for the iPad is an exact replica oiaf the iPhone interface. ”

Pardon me for parsing ideas too closely but this sounds like they started small and then went larger, yes?

It would seem to me that it’s easier to define the core of an experience and then supplement up and out as/if more screen real estate becomes available. It would also make sense to focus on the experience that is most likely to be experienced. That is, if there’s some fringe experience (e.g. 10″ screen) why should it be given the same weight as a smartphone (i.e., 90% of usage)? Is there not danger in trying to be all things to all people all the time?

Agreed. Consistency is essential. But it’s not clear – in an article of this length? – whether you’re emphasizing visual consistent or a consistent experience? There’s a difference, yes?