-
Page size
What should the default page size be set to? I use Dynamic & some how I've
messed up the settings & not sure what to re-set the new page size at...
--
Gary Short
coolweb-fx.com
web-designer | database apps | video presentations
-
Re: Page size
I still set mine to a tad under 800 wide. Most people seem to be moving
towards larger/higher resolution now but I think it still pays to err on the
side of caution.
Just my 2p.
--
Ian
1AHost
Free Web Hosting
PHP & MySQL Hosting
Multiple Domain Hosting
www.1ahost.co.uk
"Gary Short" <gary@coolweb-fx.com> wrote in message
news:f2s3sk$m7o5@flsun90netnews01.netobjects.com.. .
> What should the default page size be set to? I use Dynamic & some how I've
> messed up the settings & not sure what to re-set the new page size at...
>
> --
> Gary Short
> coolweb-fx.com
> web-designer | database apps | video presentations
>
>
-
Richard Wayne Garganta
Guest
Re: Page size
Ian wrote:
> I still set mine to a tad under 800 wide. Most people seem to be moving
> towards larger/higher resolution now but I think it still pays to err on the
> side of caution.
>
> Just my 2p.
>
> --
> Ian
> 1AHost
>
> Free Web Hosting
> PHP & MySQL Hosting
> Multiple Domain Hosting
> www.1ahost.co.uk
>
>
> "Gary Short" <gary@coolweb-fx.com> wrote in message
> news:f2s3sk$m7o5@flsun90netnews01.netobjects.com.. .
>> What should the default page size be set to? I use Dynamic & some how I've
>> messed up the settings & not sure what to re-set the new page size at...
>>
>> --
>> Gary Short
>> coolweb-fx.com
>> web-designer | database apps | video presentations
>>
>>
>
>
For what is worth, the people using less than 1024 X 768 now is
minuscule. They are using this or higher.
-
Re: Page size
Screen resolution doesn't tell the whole story. Viewport is the size that
you should be concerned with. Sadly, most stat reports don't detect
viewport without help. So I'll save you some time and tell you that
according to recent data, most people with displays of 1024 +++ typically
keep their browser viewport sized to less than maximum. Of course, this size
can vary widely. So short of building liquid layouts that scale to every
possible viewport size, the next best solution is to build pages that fit
nicely on an 800 px wide viewport, without <scrolling>. Ian's advice is
good. I use 780 to allow for browser padding...
--Nancy
"Richard Wayne Garganta" <richinri@cox.net> wrote in message
news:f2ss8q$pip3@flsun90netnews01.netobjects.com.. .
> Ian wrote:
> > I still set mine to a tad under 800 wide. Most people seem to be moving
> > towards larger/higher resolution now but I think it still pays to err on
the
> > side of caution.
> >
> > Just my 2p.
> >
> > --
> > Ian
> > 1AHost
> >
> > Free Web Hosting
> > PHP & MySQL Hosting
> > Multiple Domain Hosting
> > www.1ahost.co.uk
> >
> >
> > "Gary Short" <gary@coolweb-fx.com> wrote in message
> > news:f2s3sk$m7o5@flsun90netnews01.netobjects.com.. .
> >> What should the default page size be set to? I use Dynamic & some how
I've
> >> messed up the settings & not sure what to re-set the new page size
at...
> >>
> >> --
> >> Gary Short
> >> coolweb-fx.com
> >> web-designer | database apps | video presentations
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> For what is worth, the people using less than 1024 X 768 now is
> minuscule. They are using this or higher.
-
Richard Wayne Garganta
Guest
Re: Page size
Nancy O wrote:
> Screen resolution doesn't tell the whole story. Viewport is the size that
> you should be concerned with. Sadly, most stat reports don't detect
> viewport without help. So I'll save you some time and tell you that
> according to recent data, most people with displays of 1024 +++ typically
> keep their browser viewport sized to less than maximum. Of course, this size
> can vary widely. So short of building liquid layouts that scale to every
> possible viewport size, the next best solution is to build pages that fit
> nicely on an 800 px wide viewport, without <scrolling>. Ian's advice is
> good. I use 780 to allow for browser padding...
>
> --Nancy
>
> "Richard Wayne Garganta" <richinri@cox.net> wrote in message
> news:f2ss8q$pip3@flsun90netnews01.netobjects.com.. .
>> Ian wrote:
>>> I still set mine to a tad under 800 wide. Most people seem to be moving
>>> towards larger/higher resolution now but I think it still pays to err on
> the
>>> side of caution.
>>>
>>> Just my 2p.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Ian
>>> 1AHost
>>>
>>> Free Web Hosting
>>> PHP & MySQL Hosting
>>> Multiple Domain Hosting
>>> www.1ahost.co.uk
>>>
>>>
>>> "Gary Short" <gary@coolweb-fx.com> wrote in message
>>> news:f2s3sk$m7o5@flsun90netnews01.netobjects.com.. .
>>>> What should the default page size be set to? I use Dynamic & some how
> I've
>>>> messed up the settings & not sure what to re-set the new page size
> at...
>>>> --
>>>> Gary Short
>>>> coolweb-fx.com
>>>> web-designer | database apps | video presentations
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>> For what is worth, the people using less than 1024 X 768 now is
>> minuscule. They are using this or higher.
>
>
Good point but every stat I see says 1024 by 768 is king now. Agreed,
most open browsers in all different sizes and close them after
downsizing them making it uncertain what size it will open in. But
having watched users over years when they focus on a site, they usually
ALWAYS hit the maximize button automatically. For that reason I say,
why have a billboard with 400 or so pixels lost to nothing but empty
space or background?
I can't remember what technical article I read that said the resolutions
are going to get even higher, shrinking content even more requiring the
800 by 600's be redone anyway. He stated we should be programming now
for 1024.
I find it most curious in business that one would never consider a print
or media ad, business card, stationary or billboard that does not take
up the maximum of the space you paid for. Some how in websites - people
want to consider other peoples ads might want to be viewed at the same time.
My philosophy is - if they want to view my ad - I will take up the whole
screen or at least as much as I can take up given the realities of the
media.
-
Re: Page size
> having watched users over years when they focus on a site, they usually
> ALWAYS hit the maximize button automatically.
I know many users who don't. I'm one of them.
Allison
-
Richard Wayne Garganta
Guest
Re: Page size
Allison Moore wrote:
>> having watched users over years when they focus on a site, they
>> usually ALWAYS hit the maximize button automatically.
>
> I know many users who don't. I'm one of them.
>
> Allison
>
>
But certainly you must know that is an exception to the general rule.
Either way, if they didn't maximize then one wouldn't really know what
size to make the window since there is any number of possible
combinations. So there certainly wouldn't be anything magic about 800 x
600. I have seen sites on higher resolution screens that are set at 800
x 600. You need to take a good look at them. In higher resolutions,
which is becoming increasingly common, they look ridiculous.
-
Re: Page size
With larger, ultra large and even side-by-side displays, people are
beginning to work differently than they have in the past. My web building
colleagues and I keep several apps open on the desktop at once. So while
displays are getting bigger, available real estate isn't necessarily
expanding.
I prefer it when web pages DO NOT force me to maximize my screen to see all
the content. 800-900 pixels of allocated desktop should be plenty for most
web pages. Incidentally, my Google analytics stats show 14% still using 800
screen res. So my suggestion is to look at your own stats and build pages
accordingly.
--Nancy
"Richard Wayne Garganta" <richinri@cox.net> wrote in message
news:f2tq65$slf1@flsun90netnews01.netobjects.com.. .
> Allison Moore wrote:
> >> having watched users over years when they focus on a site, they
> >> usually ALWAYS hit the maximize button automatically.
> >
> > I know many users who don't. I'm one of them.
> >
> > Allison
> >
> >
> But certainly you must know that is an exception to the general rule.
> Either way, if they didn't maximize then one wouldn't really know what
> size to make the window since there is any number of possible
> combinations. So there certainly wouldn't be anything magic about 800 x
> 600. I have seen sites on higher resolution screens that are set at 800
> x 600. You need to take a good look at them. In higher resolutions,
> which is becoming increasingly common, they look ridiculous.
-
Richard Wayne Garganta
Guest
Re: Page size
Nancy O wrote:
> With larger, ultra large and even side-by-side displays, people are
> beginning to work differently than they have in the past. My web building
> colleagues and I keep several apps open on the desktop at once. So while
> displays are getting bigger, available real estate isn't necessarily
> expanding.
>
> I prefer it when web pages DO NOT force me to maximize my screen to see all
> the content. 800-900 pixels of allocated desktop should be plenty for most
> web pages. Incidentally, my Google analytics stats show 14% still using 800
> screen res. So my suggestion is to look at your own stats and build pages
> accordingly.
>
> --Nancy
>
>
> "Richard Wayne Garganta" <richinri@cox.net> wrote in message
> news:f2tq65$slf1@flsun90netnews01.netobjects.com.. .
>> Allison Moore wrote:
>>>> having watched users over years when they focus on a site, they
>>>> usually ALWAYS hit the maximize button automatically.
>>> I know many users who don't. I'm one of them.
>>>
>>> Allison
>>>
>>>
>> But certainly you must know that is an exception to the general rule.
>> Either way, if they didn't maximize then one wouldn't really know what
>> size to make the window since there is any number of possible
>> combinations. So there certainly wouldn't be anything magic about 800 x
>> 600. I have seen sites on higher resolution screens that are set at 800
>> x 600. You need to take a good look at them. In higher resolutions,
>> which is becoming increasingly common, they look ridiculous.
>
>
My stats show 9% using 800 x 600 and 14% using resolutions higher than
1024 by 768 with the overwhelming majority using 1024x768.
My comments and coding practice is based on this reality. Clearly you
haven't seen 800 by 600 on newer wide high resolution monitors - the
sites look like a business card.
-
Re: Page size
Richard Wayne Garganta wrote
> For what is worth, the people using less than 1024 X 768 now is
> minuscule. They are using this or higher.
I have to differ on this one. Depending on the site and it's potential
audience, the percentage using lower resolution is significant. Art and
architectural based sites tend to have users on hi-res monitors.
Business visitors often 1024 and below, and there's still a measurable
percentage using 800 x 600.
I made the mistake a while back of producing a 900 wide site, and got
complaints. Until that small percentage of 800 x 600 users dies, we
sadly have to cater for them or use fluid layouts.
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules