| 1:58 pm on Apr 30, 2004 (gmt 0)|
This one is 3 months old, but filled with information.
| 1:58 pm on Apr 30, 2004 (gmt 0)|
It depends on the type of site you run.
I find in my pages that appeal to programmers and other techies that I almost never get someone under 1024 and often higher.
In my pages of more academic or religous interest 800 still rules ... or is a very close 2nd to 1024.
I see very few 640's.
Those are my stats, for what they're worth.
| 2:03 pm on Apr 30, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Thanks. I guess I still have to pay some attention to it.
It came up because I was putting ads on my pages and they don't fit at 800 so -- at least for the start -- I just left them off at 800.
| 6:36 pm on Apr 30, 2004 (gmt 0)|
If you read that thread posted in msg #2 above , read the post msg #14, here's a quote:
"people with big screens never look at websites in full screen"
I agree. For me, the value of big screen is increased desktop space, not to enlarge the web browser. I hate those tech sites that force me to full screen.
We currently hold the width at about 720 to 750 pixels in sites we build.
It's a point of design/architecture pride that if we feel we have to build it wider it's because we haven't designed it well enough.
| 7:21 pm on Apr 30, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Not so common, but a standard TV has an effective resolution of about 610 pixels wide. And most phones have about 100 pixels.
Then again, many current laptops start at 1400 pixels.
The more time that passes, the more diverse the audience will become.
Best to make a fluid design now and save yourself time and headaches later.
| 7:32 pm on Apr 30, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I sit between dwilson and rossH about this.
We sometimes err on 1024 for B2B sites, but we definitly stick to 800 for B2C.
| 8:18 pm on Apr 30, 2004 (gmt 0)|
While we're on the subject, I have never understood why webmasters create graphics for 800 and then display then on the left side of 1024. Looks bad to me; can't figure out why they don't just center the page.
Anyway, I just make mine adjust to the width of the user.
| 8:31 pm on Apr 30, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Beats me too, peterinwa,
I guess we could partially blame Apple on this one. Wy are the most common menues on the left side of the sreen, while the scrollbar is on the right side?
Same for most website's main navigation on the left side.
| 8:41 pm on Apr 30, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Regarding the left-side of screen, I think that it depends on the design you make. We sometimes design pages in a way that they are nicer if they are kept left, and some designs are better looking when they are centered. The side and top of the browser can be a visual support that you can use. It is not always better to center...
| 12:56 am on May 2, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I beleive 1024x768+ is the most common screen resolution.
Well, according to [webmasterworld.com...] it is.
I still prefer 800x600 though, small and cute. :)
| 1:14 am on May 2, 2004 (gmt 0)|
|Wy are the most common menues on the left side of the sreen, while the scrollbar is on the right side? |
Oh, I tend to absolve apple of THIS one anyway. I really believe it's because most of US (the western world) reads left to right, so a menu left and a simple scroll right makes more "sense" to our western-world-oriented brains.
| 7:35 pm on May 7, 2004 (gmt 0)|
"the most common menues on the left side of the sreen, while the scrollbar is on the right side"
Yeah, that's just to do with an L-to-R writing system. If you don't like your scrollbar on the right, then just set your User Preferences to put it on the left instead (in Linux and some other OSes)
As for the resolution data, it looks as though there's a 3-way split, and this split will widen with time. But anyway, all the statistics in the world won't help a user with a monitor width of 2048 who can't read your oversmall text... Keep it adaptable and you won't alienate anybody.
| 4:52 pm on May 9, 2004 (gmt 0)|
|We currently hold the width at about 720 to 750 pixels in sites we build. |
I do the same, although I'm usually closer to 750-770, leaving just enough room for the vertical scroll bar in full screen at 800. Even though none of my own screens are set as low as 800 (I'm another one who likes the extra screen space I get with a higher resolution), I know there are still a lot of people out there who prefer a lower resolution.
| 5:07 pm on May 9, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I prefer a liquid layout using an external stylesheet. Fits well in both resolutions and fills the screen at 1024.
| 9:10 am on May 11, 2004 (gmt 0)|
exactly go60guy thats what i do as well using set pixel width columns in a table for the buttons on the left and the cental part is all relative to your browser
seems 2 work for me!
| 12:49 am on May 14, 2004 (gmt 0)|
We do as the above also ie the centre fills the spaces.
With us some weeks its 40% 600. 60% 1024 and other weeks 50 50 and then others 40-60 the other way round. So we just make sure we look OK in both. I foolishly thought that EVEREYONE must have these huge monitors by now but even if they do some people (like my brother)seem to prefer the 600x800
| 7:37 am on May 14, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I'd love to use a huge monitor all the time, Peter.
But I can't fit one in the bag with the laptop.
And it would spoil the line of my jacket if I tried to slip one in a shirt pocket with the PDA.
I guess I have to get used to browsing with different browsers and resolutions at different times.
Which generally means I access sites that work well under any of those conditions.
| 10:27 pm on May 14, 2004 (gmt 0)|
If you are looking for ways to solve your website's screen resolution problem, check out this thread: