Forum Moderators: open

Message Too Old, No Replies

800x600 vs 1024x768

where to aim ?

         

bcc1234

9:11 am on Aug 9, 2002 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



Hi all, I'm creating a new site (a store), and I was wondering if it's a safe bet to design a site for 1024x768 resolution ?

Before, I aimed at visitors with 800x600 resoluton.

Is it the time yet to move the standard up a bit ?

scareduck

10:21 pm on Aug 16, 2002 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



I *hate* fullscreen. Why should my browser (or any other app) monopolize my desktop? It doesn't happen in real life.

gethan

12:51 am on Aug 17, 2002 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



Completely unscientific but a nice anecdote...

I'm sitting in an Internet cafe in Guatemala, Central America. The have good computers here, pretty new, 17inch monitors... all running at 800x600... they're capable of running at 1600x1200.

It's been similar in many of the internet cafes I have been to in Mexico and Guatemala.

2c.

Gethan

rewboss

8:23 am on Aug 17, 2002 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



They may be capable of running at that resolution, but that doesn't mean they should. 1600x1200 is far too high a resolution for a 17" screen.

electro

9:04 am on Aug 17, 2002 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



Unless they are really good 17" monitors, that is far to high a resolution. The 17" monitor I use here is in fact being pushed when I run it at 1024x768, and it's not a bad monitor. The refresh rates start going to pot if you push normal 17"ers.

Duckula

1:19 pm on Aug 17, 2002 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



On an internet cafe is important to keep the screen at a resolution such that anyone that comes in can read it. You don't know when an 80 years old lady is going to enter to read her email, on the extreme case. Changing font sizes on the fly, even with keyboard shortcuts, may not be a good solution. So for a cafe 800x600 it is. I haven't ever heard any complaints, and I've done some work on one.

c3oc3o

9:49 pm on Aug 17, 2002 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



Just thought I'd throw in some more statistics:

Screen resolution:

00.00% <640 (391)
01.85% 640x480 (415,348)
34.26% 800x600 (7,680,977)
49.01% 1024x768 (10,988,980)
06.16% 1152x864 (1,381,163)
07.33% 1280x1024 (1,642,410)
00.79% 1280> (176,634)
00.60% other (134,504)

Sample size 22.4 million, from over 1,000 different international sites, mainly personal/non-commercial though and high European percentage, March-August 2002.

Actual current window width:

08.40% <639 (2,308,930) <-- don't ask me
03.19% 640 exactly (877,804)
09.17% 641-799 (2,519,048)
27.87% 800 exactly (7,661,259)
13.06% 801-1023 (3,588,319)
29.98% 1024 exactly (8,239,647)
05.08% 1025-1279 (1,396,570)
02.93% 1280 exactly (805,539)
00.32% 1281< (87,933)

Sample size 27.5 million, same sites and period as above.

So adding up, that's 62% with a current window size below 1024.

Oh and about ALT+TAB not being useful if you have lots of windows open: There's an XP Powertoy availible for free from Microsoft that lets you select a window to switch to instead of just cycling though, and also shows previews of the window's contents as you TAB through.

fonzerelli 79

12:14 pm on Aug 19, 2002 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



i think im the only one here who actually uses a 800x600 pixel resolution and i hate it when webmasters optimise for 1024 and above

ive had a pc since around 95 and have upgraded about three times though i have always kept my crappy monitor
i still think we're a good 3 or 4 years til 800x600 resolution traffic can be considered neglible

rewboss

12:36 pm on Aug 19, 2002 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



I use 800x600... mostly (actually, as I type this, I happen to be on 1024x768, but I'll change it back when I've finished laying out this newsletter I'm taking a break from).

madcat

2:48 pm on Aug 19, 2002 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



So, it seems that 800x600 is still very prolific and can't yet be ignored

Why not just design for all screen resolutions;)

tedster

2:56 pm on Aug 19, 2002 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



c3oc3o - thanks for those stats. That's what I was hoping someone could share with us. And it certainly show the challenege of designing intelligently for "all" screen settings.

Imagine a totally liquid design with no max-width, stretching the entire width of a 1600+ monitor. That would NOT be easy to read. Maybe people don't worry about that .32% right now, but for certain target markets, they just may be the power users and the big decision makers.

weisinator

6:47 pm on Aug 19, 2002 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



Since I didn't find an answer to another's earlier question about a centered 800x600 fixed resolution, I'll answer it.

The centered fixed resolution is centered with <center> between the <body> tag and the initial <table> tag. Use <TD ALIGN="LEFT> to keep text inside the table aligned left.

Personally, the only reason I can see to using fixed widths is because one uses Photoshop for design and wants to keep the site looking the same across as many browsers as possible after slicing.

I use images sparingly, opting instead for HTML to provide my color and layout. I use fixed width layouts (optimised for 800px wide), because that's what visitors are expecting. I give them a pleasant surprise with a fast-loading site, not loaded down with useless chrome.

andrey_sea

10:00 pm on Aug 22, 2002 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



andrey_sea, how does one auto hide the IE tool bar "so I don't see any browser or windows controls." ???

keyplyr,

1. Click "Full Screen" icon (if you don't have it go through: View->Toolbars->Customize and add it)
2. Right click the small iconized IE controls bar and select "Auto-Hide"

Duckula

12:37 am on Aug 23, 2002 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



Or press F11 (if I remember correctly). Then rightclick and autohide.
This 73 message thread spans 3 pages: 73