Forum Moderators: open
There are some on here who swear by 800x600, but many large sites are changing ie. CNN, NY Times, and many others.
My site's current stats are as follows...
1. 1024 x 768 pixels 13,610 58.54
2. 800 x 600 pixels 4,328 18.60
3. Other Resolutions 2,591 11.13
4. 1280 x 1024 pixels 1,846 7.93
5. 1152 x 864 pixels 744 3.19
6. 1600 x 1200 pixels 104 0.44
7. 640 x 480 pixels 41 0.17
This will be a massive undertaking, and I would love to get some input first.
Thanks guys.
Buz
If you (or anyone else) truly feels the need to design a page wider than 800, but have concerns for those lower-rez users, then I would suggest you forgo a fixed-width altogether and use a liquid layout technique. You might have to sacrifice some design elements, but it's the happiest medium for the bulk of your users.
Page layouts that were designed for 800 resolution will increasingly seem archaic and obsolete.
So, I think the real question is when (not whether) you should make the changeover, and whether you should adopt a fixed, or liquid, design at the time you make the change.
If you think it is a massive job now, think about how much harder it will be in a few years, if your site keeps growing...
Matt
For someone choosing to go for an optimum 800x600, the <body> width should be set at a 780px max. Go beyond that, and IE displays a horizontal scroll bar. After experimenting on that for a while, I found that FF, NN and Opera can tolerate a couple more pixels more prior displaying the scroll bar. I am not entirely sure; someone else might have something else to comment on that, but 780px (with no outer borders) certainly worked for me. Now I just have to sit back and fear when the day comes that the 800x600 will be like 640x480 is now. This day is not yet, but it is inevitable.
Hope this helps.
