Forum Moderators: martinibuster
As one of those seniors, who needs very large print, I surf the web in 800x600 screen resolution so I can read the pages with larger print. On sites where the pages were designed in 1024x768, this gives me a horizontal scroll bar at the bottom of the page. Makes it interesting for me, as I redesign my own sites, originally constructed for 800x600, into the 1024x768 screen resolution. I have to keep changing my screen resolution, so I can see the end results, as others see them, as well as how I see them. At the same time we are centering our content, so it views better in all screen res.
Anyway...
I noticed today in my Adsense account, my screen resolution was automatically detected, unknown to me, and I was served my account details based on my 800x600 screen resolution. Previously, it was very annoying to view the channel info, line by line, as it involved constant scrolling. Since I am in and out so quickly, I don't bother to change my screen res, just to view my Adsense account. So, this is a very nice feature. Since there was no hint screen resolution was being detected, those of you already in 1024x768 or better, wouldn't have noticed this.
Gave me some thought. If Google is beginning to do this for Adsense publishers, I see in the future, search results served based on the visitor's resolution, and perhaps even serving only results that are optimized and suitable for the screen resolution used.
That would be an excellent user feature because it removes the problem of landing on pages where the font is way too small, or way too large, or there are scroll bars. Since Google is all about the user experience, this seems like a logical evolution to me, and most likely very close to realization.
This means if I surf into Google search with a Blackberry, I would see relevant search results based on my screen resolution, and only sites designed for that screen resolution would be served. I also see an option to 'show all results' which would include all screen res, or perhaps the ability to select just a few that would be suitable.
Thinking more on that... what a good way to purge the engines of old, outdated pages. If you haven't updated pages to a modern screen resolution, then you are not actively managing your business, and out you go. This puts the pressure on those sites designed in 800x600, especially those designed for 640x480, to update their pages, or fall to the bottom of the search results when Google decides that based on the 'updated content' criteria of the algo, your site is not relevant enough.
It could also potential land a decapitating blow to Adsense publishers, who have old screen res sites, as your search engine ranking tanks, traffic goes to a crawl, and the resulting clicks on ads disappear.
Funny thing, I discovered this change, right after coffee break where we were discussing the screen resolution and load problem with designing for Blackberry, et al.
I think this is a wake up call to all webmasters, things are changing, and you need to be on the proactive end of the change, ground level, instead of doing knee jerk, or you might very well wake up one day to a huge drop in Adsense earnings, and have no idea at all why.
According to my statistics my visitor's screen res are as follows.
1024x768 = 55%
800x600 = 25%
1280 x 1024 = 6%
1152 x 864 = 3%
1280 x 800 = 2%
60+ other screen res = 9%
One thing, since I view my pages alot in the course of viewing my updated pages, my stats for 800x600 are off because that is the res I use. The percentage would be much higher of 1024x768 if my own stats were not included. My guess, based on the number of page views I do here in my work, I would say 1024x768 is closer to 65%
Clearly, most sites designed in 1024x768 would be suitable for the majority of users, likely as high as 79% of the screen resolutions. The sites that would get excluded alot in search results would be those old screen res designed sites. As well, you wouldn't be served a page designed for blackberry, if you were on a 800x600 machine. A very good thing :) I see this as the answer to the problem the web has: a wide range of screen resolution used, all viewings sites designed for one screen resolution. Yes, I know some webmasters have resolved this with screen resolution detection, but they are a huge minority of the web.
The questions are:
Is your site designed for the masses, or the few?
How do you think that fact will impact your traffic, long term, and your Adsense commissions?
Is the design all about what you want, of what the visitor needs?
I see a thread in the future:
The ulimate Google 'penalty'... failure to present content in a 'popular' format.
By the time I had posted this thread, the old screen res was back at my Adsense publisher's page. Looks like I happen to log in the first time during a test of the new feature.
The little things in life, often turn out to have the largest impact on lives and business.
Designing for all screen resolutions, does that mean you use screen resolution detection?
.... or
When it comes to font size, you can let your users chose the font size by using different CSS files. Small, medium and large. Plus, you can even let them chose the color palette with this method.
It's a good idea if Google made this. However, if you ask what would be more convenient, I'd say that it's being able to set the font size in AdSense units. A human would decide better on where to place which ad and what text size the ads should be rendered. This would obviously lead to sky rocketing CTR and profits for both the publishers and Google. Of course, I understand that there should be limits to this freedom to modify, but I don't understand why we're limited so much at the moment.
The fact: Just similar to image banner-blindness, web surfers are getting used to current AdSense ad unit sizes/layout and the overall CTR will drop unavoidably unless Google offers more customization options.
besides you don't need to use 800x600 for bigger text, most browsers have a feature to increase the size of the text (ctrl +) on firefox.
As a designer, we design for morons. Assume the visitor knows absolutely nothing, and make a great experience for him, without making your brighter bulbs feel like morons and reducing their experience to patty cake. That is the game plan. You sit on the viewing end of your website, with one of 100 different types of machines and user experience levels and look at your site from their point of view.
Until late last year, I did website design. Most of my clients were educated, many with a PHD, none of them idiots, and I can tell you that maybe one of them even knew what screen resolution was. I know, because I tutored them in all aspects of their business, and most barely knew how to turn the machine on.
Most (over 90%) had no idea what a browser was, couldn't import their email to their machine, and couldn't adjust the machine or the monitor for anything. They had no idea they could click the TOOLS link at the top of the browser, and make adjustments. Working with them to get their business online required much more than explaining ecommerce, and that is one major reason I closed the business. If those 999 out of 1,000 people, the brightest of the bright didn't understand their machine and how to adjust it, what does that tell you?
It tells you that you design for the masses, not for you.
There are very few users using Firefox, so designing a site thinking that your users are familiar with those tools, is a crucial error. You design for IE users, it is the norm. 84% of average everyday, non-tech type users use IE 6.0. Only 8% use Firefox. If you have a tech site, that caters to techs, it might be different. Techs tend to use Firefox. I have 10,000 users a month who do not use IE, should I ignore their needs? Still, if 85% of your visitors use Firefox, do you ignore the other 15% and their experience level? Not if you are in this for the money. 15% of 100,000 is 15,000 visitors, and that is potentially a whole LOT of clicks and Adsense revenue.
To further make a point, I had 13,197 visitors this month, surf on in using IE 5.0. What kind of a user is still using IE 5.0? Better yet, 1049 visitors came in on IE 4.0. Do you understand what is like to surf your site with IE4.0 or 5.0? Do you know how it looks to a person who doesn't know enough to upgrade their browser? This is the same person you think can figure out how to change their font in their browser tools.
I don't think so.
What level of internet experience do you think a user has who uses IE 4.0 or 5.0? Do you know how different a site looks with a machine stright out of the box, and Win95 on it from one with WinNT or Win2000 on it, from one with WinXP on it? Major differences there. Think about that.
When the site stats tell me my visitors have a wide range of browsers, screen res, os, and even language, to design a site based on what I use, is not realistic. If you use Firefox, you are an exception to the rule, why would you design a site based on what you see? We are in business to present content to others, and in this particular forum, to make money doing it. Since the goal is revenue, you MUST design to make money. If you don't, you shoot yourself in the foot.
Major players see that, and they adjust their site so that the masses can view it, easily, and will be comfortable enough to come back again and again. This is why the # was placed in front of font codes in html. It is why we quit using <blink>. It is all about the masses, not us. That is why screen resolution detection is so important. The types of machine on the market keeps growing each month. We have to design for a wider and wider range or machines, and users.
My main machine is 1.5 years old, and has 800x600 screen resolution. In my office, I have 6 machines, all with different settings, so we can view pages as the vast majority of users see our site. It would be nice to have 60 machines here, all with different browsers and settings, but that is not pratical. So, we limp along with only 6. But, it tells us alot about how the visitor sees us, and there is a huge differece from one machine to another depending on the os and screen resolution used.
Have you ever viewed your site in another language? There is an eye opener. Prepared to be shocked at how ugly page your might be in French, German, Spanish, or Traditional Chinese. I had 1,091 visitors see my site in Italian this month. I can tell you they did not see what I saw, but they likely contributed to my revenue as Adsense detected their location, and served ads targeted to Italians.
You can not design a site for 1024x768 desktop and notebook users that will also be a great experience for Blackberry users. If you design it for Blackberry users, every other visitor will say it sucks. That reason alone is the foundation of a multi-million projects underway at this very moment, to begin creating a network within the web, that is focused to Blackberry users, specifically.
This is the reason, I believe, we are on the threshold of seeing browser detection in Google search results. The difference from one browser to another is like night and day. In one browser a site looks fine, in another it is unreadable. Why would I want search results to sites that I can not read? I wouldn't, no more than I want search results served in Russian, when my first language is English.
It is time to take a real good look at your visitor stats, and figure out how many users will not see your site in search results, based on the machine they are using, if engines go to browser detection based search results. Don't look at the percentages, look at actual numbers. Then look at your Adsense impressions, CTR, and PPC and do the math on what it might cost you in Adsense revenue if that happens.
Now, how do you feel about designing for yourself, and not everybody else? Puts a whole new light on it, doesn't it?
Nielsen is a genius.
The key is designing for the majority of users, IE 6.0, and 1024x768 through 1680x1050, with centered(page float) content.
depends on the site i would guess.. my site isn't for the average 'dumb' person.
if you build a site that focuses around dumb people then yes, you design for "morons". on the other hand, if you run a tech/game site, then most visitors are smart enough to know how to play around with software settings.
unless you have a page with just text and no graphic, etc, forget trying to make a site compatible with 800x600. it is almost impossible and i certainly don't have the time for under 1% of my visitors that use that screen res (that under 1% of visitors probably reached my site by mistake anyway). i am not going to render my site useless to support that screen resolution.
just my opinion.
The key is designing for the majority of users, IE 6.0, and 1024x768 through 1680x1050
Why design for a specific range of resolutions at all?
Remember, screen resolution isn't an indicator of browser-window size. One reason for having a high screen resolution is to use multiple windows. On my 20" 1280 x 1024 display, for example, I never use IE, Firefox, or Opera at full screen width. At most, my browser window covers 75% of the screen's width, and that figure includes a generous sidebar or "Explorer bar."
I wonder, how many webmasters actually surf the web using all the major browsers, os, and monitors and their most popular varibles, and see what the masses see? If you don't, I guess it would be very hard to understand anything outside what you personally do. Site stats, though very helpful, are no substitution for actually getting out there and sufing under various circumstances, with various machines.
I'm thinking there will be the usual flood of posters here, who rush to whine when their traffic drops, and their Adsense sales drop. The really bad part of that, is... if they search for their keywords, using their own screen resolution, and they designed their site in that specific screen resolution and the site was placed in algo for those compatible screen res, when the webmaster searches, they may come up #1, while the masses may never see their site listing, if the webmaster's machine is not the 'norm'. They will never see the problem, or be able to resolve it. Narrow minded thinking, will bring a narrow field of visitors.
This is one of those preventable situations, if you chose to prevent it. If not, you deal with the aftermath. There are always those who refuse to do what is required in order to succeed in business. That is their choice.
We are changing all our pages on all sites, to view nicely in 1024x768 and 800x600. As well, they will view nicely in screen resolutions through 16xx.
You have to assume that the visitor will open the browser full screen. Just because you don't, doesn't mean the rest of the world doesn't. I have watched thousands of people surf the web across the U.S and Canada in libraries, internet cafes, street cafes, personal homes, offices ... and all but a few opened the browser full screen. That is 'normal' surfing behavior.
Again, if you are designing for profits, don't design based on what you do, instead what the averge user does.
Moron, is subjective. Techno speaking, the majority of visitors to the majority of websites are techno morons. They know how to double click the blue e on their desktop, how to click on links, use the 'back' browser button, use email, and how to type in order information on an ecommerce site. Many know very little more than that, and would be classified as techno morons, and they don't care. The web is not their life.
These people all have money to spend on the web, and to simply disregard their money, is not a wise business practice. WW does not present an accurate cross section of internet users, so it would be a mistake to think that you and your peers here at WW are the 'norm'.
Some will fight and scream for share of market in search engine results and ranking, and yet would alientate a small percentage of visitors, rather than design for all of them, something accomplished very easily.
1 million visitors a month. You don't design for 1% of them, that is 10,000 visitors a month, 120,000 a year. If the average CTR is 10%, 12,000 visitors will not see the ads. If your average ppc is .22, you will lose over $2600 a year in Adsense revenue. That would be considered one month full time income where I live, 3 months income at minimum wage. That is alot to sneeze at.
But, I guess in that tax bracket, you could throw that money out the window, and not give it a second though. I really hope that means you are in my industry. I will gladly stand outside your window with a bucket. I'm sure there are alot of Adsense publshers who would fight me for a spot beneath your window.
