SitePoint Sponsor

User Tag List

Results 1 to 23 of 23
  1. #1
    SitePoint Wizard westmich's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Location
    Muskegon, MI
    Posts
    2,328
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Interesting article -
    The reason why 800x600 has been adopted as the standard Web page size is clear: Average screen resolutions of Web surfers can easily be obtained. Here are the latest statistics worldwide:

    640x480: 7%
    800x600: 53%
    1024x768: 31%
    1152x864: 2.5%
    1280x1024: 2.5%
    other: 4%
    (Source: statmarket.com February 17, 2001 based on a sample size of 50,465,595 Web sites; numbers rounded to the nearest .5%.)
    from - http://webreview.com/2001/03_16/weba.../index01.shtml
    Westmich
    Smart Web Solutions for Smart Clients
    http://www.mindscapecreative.com

  2. #2
    The Hiding One lynlimz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    2,103
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Cool
    Thanks for the statistics.
    Glad that 800 by 600 and 1024 by 768 is used majority
    "Imagination is more important than knowledge. Knowledge is limited. Imagination encircles the world."
    -- Albert Einstein

  3. #3
    SitePoint Wizard westmich's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Location
    Muskegon, MI
    Posts
    2,328
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Originally posted by lynlimz
    Cool
    Thanks for the statistics.
    Glad that 800 by 600 and 1024 by 768 is used majority
    Perhaps I should have posted more of the article. I think the point the author was making is not to design for any one screen size.
    Westmich
    Smart Web Solutions for Smart Clients
    http://www.mindscapecreative.com

  4. #4
    I'm a college yuppie now! sbdi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Dublin , Ireland
    Posts
    1,271
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    but if you use % in your table widths/heights you should be ok?
    Back Again

  5. #5
    The Hiding One lynlimz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    2,103
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    LOL WestMich.
    My site doesn't support 640 by 468

    Howveer, it supports resolution all above.
    I can't support 640 by 468 if I want to have a content-based site. I'll work in this resolution for the user interface
    "Imagination is more important than knowledge. Knowledge is limited. Imagination encircles the world."
    -- Albert Einstein

  6. #6
    SitePoint Wizard Goof's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    1,154
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    westmich, i don't think anything of what you pasted tries to identify that we should not just design for one resolution...in fact, with 84% of web users using two resolutions I would say it even goes to argue the opposite.

    Goof
    Nathan Rutman
    A slightly offbeat creative.

  7. #7
    SitePoint Wizard westmich's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Location
    Muskegon, MI
    Posts
    2,328
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Originally posted by Goof
    westmich, i don't think anything of what you pasted tries to identify that we should not just design for one resolution...in fact, with 84% of web users using two resolutions I would say it even goes to argue the opposite.

    Goof
    I pasted a quote from the article. The article is what I was trying to get people to read. I thought it was interesting, although, many of my sites have been designed at a fixed size.

    LOL - I wanted to email the author since his/her article is being displayed in a fixed size.
    Westmich
    Smart Web Solutions for Smart Clients
    http://www.mindscapecreative.com

  8. #8
    SitePoint Wizard Goof's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    1,154
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    haha...

    Goof
    Nathan Rutman
    A slightly offbeat creative.

  9. #9
    junkyrddog's Other Half emmester's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Posts
    375
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Originally posted by lynlimz
    LOL WestMich.
    My site doesn't support 640 by 468

    Howveer, it supports resolution all above.
    I can't support 640 by 468 if I want to have a content-based site. I'll work in this resolution for the user interface
    I also only design for 800x600 or higher. I have a resolution of 1024x768, though. I would make it higher because I can, but my mom says I can't because she can't see anything when it is that small.

  10. #10
    The Hiding One lynlimz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    2,103
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    whats your mum gotta do with what resolution yuo design at? hhaa
    "Imagination is more important than knowledge. Knowledge is limited. Imagination encircles the world."
    -- Albert Einstein

  11. #11
    ********* Callithumpian silver trophy freakysid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    3,798
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    ho-hum, when are wed designers going to realize that my monitor is not a television screen. Do they really think that they own the whole damned real estate (and that I am honestly going to want to sit through two minutes of vector drawn dots and lines fading in and out and moving around the place before letting me get to the content -or lack of - I came for! Buts that's another rant...)

    My screen may be set 1152x870 right now - but I have no intention of giving the entire screen to your crummy web site. Especially if the site is designed so the text fills the entire width of the window.

    Have you ever watched how ppl who use slow connections browse the internet. They often have a strategy of opening several windows at once letting the content trickle down - and swap back and forth grazing amongst the content.

    IMHO, a well designed site is one that caters for the user's needs. Its their computer and you should be so lucky that they are giving your site attention over the 50 billion other sites out there. So a well designed site will work with MY font settings (half the text shouldn't disapear from layers because I have chosen a jumbo text size. And I should be able to resize my window and still see a readable web page.

    Just my two cents worth

  12. #12
    The Hiding One lynlimz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    2,103
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Yeah. You got that right.
    But have you considered the content of the site?

    To enable resolutions from 640 by 468 and above, thre must be a reduction in content display, or the result would be long scrolling pages. well...you could make up for it by reducing your navigation to top and bottom navigation menus, instead of sidebars.

    then you might say to use dhtml pull-down menus. while thre is support for all the latest major browsers, how about the loading time for all the neceesary scripting?

    well..i could go one forever about the pros and cons, but i do know what is required of my design, and so should veeryone else out here. you can't possibly support everyone. hence go for your site's statistical information. the majority. i've managed to account for 95% of my audience, maybe more. i'm satisfied. now its your turn.
    "Imagination is more important than knowledge. Knowledge is limited. Imagination encircles the world."
    -- Albert Einstein

  13. #13
    SitePoint Wizard westmich's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Location
    Muskegon, MI
    Posts
    2,328
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Originally posted by freakysid
    ...a well designed site is one that caters for the user's needs. Its their computer and you should be so lucky that they are giving your site attention over the 50 billion other sites out there.
    NOW THAT'S WORTH QUOTING!
    Westmich
    Smart Web Solutions for Smart Clients
    http://www.mindscapecreative.com

  14. #14
    code addict Abstraction's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Des Moines, IA
    Posts
    346
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Resolution != browser size. I run a resolution > 800x600 but I rarely have a browser window maximized.

  15. #15
    Gong!
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Helsinki, Finland
    Posts
    229
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Originally posted by freakysid
    My screen may be set 1152x870 right now - but I have no intention of giving the entire screen to your crummy web site. Especially if the site is designed so the text fills the entire width of the window.
    Me neither, even though I've use 1024x768 resolution I never use maximized browser windows. Actually, as I'm writing this, there is a horizontal scrollbar and I can see only half of the smilies to the right

    Have you ever watched how ppl who use slow connections browse the internet. They often have a strategy of opening several windows at once letting the content trickle down - and swap back and forth grazing amongst the content.
    I do this too, especially when browsing through forums - I usually go trough "view new posts", then I open every interesting thread to a new window and then I'll switch the thread list window to load another page if there is one. I just hop between the windows and as I said, they are never maximized.
    HighCheats - game cheats, codes, tips and tricks for PC and various console platforms

  16. #16
    The Hiding One lynlimz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    2,103
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Originally posted by hmahonen
    I do this too, especially when browsing through forums - I usually go trough "view new posts", then I open every interesting thread to a new window and then I'll switch the thread list window to load another page if there is one. I just hop between the windows and as I said, they are never maximized.
    i do that too...for maximum efficiency..
    though i make it a point to maximise the window, to give more 'air' for the content. i NEVER ( ), surf in unmaximised windows.
    "Imagination is more important than knowledge. Knowledge is limited. Imagination encircles the world."
    -- Albert Einstein

  17. #17
    SitePoint Wizard silver trophy TheOriginalH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Thailand
    Posts
    4,811
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Resolution Stats
    Sun Apr 1 00:01:04 2001 - Sat Mar 31 23:59:16 2001 -0.0 Days

    800x600 88501336 (53%)
    1024x768 52167556 (31%)
    640x480 9740988 (5%)
    1280x1024 5511732 (3%)
    1152x864 4775300 (2%)
    Unknown 2508603 (1%)
    1600x1200 884709 (0%)

    from : http://www.thecounter.com/stats/2001/March/res.html

    yepper - those stats are accurate. But in support of the "all resolutions" argument, notwithstanding the TV screen issue, any designer choosing to design only for 800*600 and above is denying their client nine million seven hundren and forty thousand nine hundred and eighty eight happy visitors a month. Try explaining that in court.......

    H

    (of course if it is your own personal site, this doesn't matter, it is only your own potential visitors you are alienating )
    ~The Artist Latterly Known as Crazy Hamster~
    922ee590a26bd62eb9b33cf2877a00df
    Currently delving into Django, GIT & CentOS

  18. #18
    SitePoint Addict superbird's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Swansea, UK
    Posts
    260
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    We get on average 52% 800x600 and 37% 1024x768 (can't remember figures for other resolutions)

    I was originally told to design the site solely for 1024x768 and above, but after two weeks the evidence from the stats was overwhelming and da boss caved
    ...KartLink...

  19. #19
    The Hiding One lynlimz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    2,103
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    lol....glad you didn't go for 1024 by 768..goosh...
    "Imagination is more important than knowledge. Knowledge is limited. Imagination encircles the world."
    -- Albert Einstein

  20. #20
    One website at a time mmj's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Melbourne Australia
    Posts
    6,282
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I've seen sites that rely on a 1024 width. Not many, mind you, but I have seen them.

    I currently use a 1152x864 res. I like the way it gives me a bit of room to move, and like freakysid, I'd hate to lose that room!

    My web browsing technique: I open up to 10 or 12 windows, and then I switch between them by clicking on the taskbar, skimming each one.

    If I want to reply to a post, I'll click the reply button but I'll skim another couple of windows before I come back and reply.

    I guess I have a multitasking mind, that can remember what 10 different pages are about. But I guess the internet has given us all these minds.

    I guess too much. Back to you.
    [mmj] My magic jigsaw
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    The Bit Depth Blog Twitter Contact me
    Neon Javascript Framework Jokes Android stuff

  21. #21
    Your daddy. WALoeIII's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    526
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    WOW

    I run 1280X1024
    and always run browser full screen, I also never run more than 5 windows, you learn not to when you aren't on 56K though, because everything just appears...

  22. #22
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Posts
    21
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I hate when people design only for 1024 resolution. When I use my computer at home I have no trouble at changing the resolution but unfortunately that's the minor of times. I am always at my trusty laptop that can't run more than 800X600.... fortunately most sites fit in this resolution.

    I have only seen a few that still design for 640X480 in mind, seems that only very old computers could be using that resolution, however the stats are creepy, 7% is really high. No serious webmaster would want to loose those visitors.

  23. #23
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    5
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    in my humble opinion:

    you're allowed to abandon the 640x480 people at this point. with the plethora of sites out there that are designing for 800x600, nothing on the web fits horizontally for 640x480 people like it used to. even yahoo and cnn don't fit (horizontally) 640x480 any more.

    nickmarcel
    Last edited by nickmarcel; Apr 19, 2001 at 19:37.
    "For NASA, space is still a high priority."
    - Governor George W. Bush, 9/5/93


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •