SitePoint Sponsor

User Tag List

View Poll Results: Do you use the 800 x 600 resolution and if so, WHY?

Voters
152. You may not vote on this poll
  • No, I use a lower resolution because of my bad vision!

    1 0.66%
  • No, I use a higher resolution!

    94 61.84%
  • Yes, I use it, because I want to see what the crowd sees!

    30 19.74%
  • Yes, I always used it, cause I like it!

    20 13.16%
  • Yes... but why, I don't know!

    7 4.61%
Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 130
  1. #26
    Making a better wheel silver trophy DR_LaRRY_PEpPeR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    3,428
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    IMO, you'd be crazy to not design for 8x6. it's not that hard if you don't use absolute sizes on things.

    that is all.
    - Matt ** Ignore old signature for now... **
    Dr.BB - Highly optimized to be 2-3x faster than the "Big 3."
    "Do not enclose numeric values in quotes -- that is very non-standard and will only work on MySQL." - MattR

  2. #27
    SitePoint Addict rush78's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Egypt
    Posts
    253
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    i use higher...1024X786 when working or whatever
    but after designing...i gotta check what someone using 800X600 will see.

    i hate that 800X600 res. it's sooooooo big
    Glad to be BACK

  3. #28
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    21
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I always design using 800 x 600. I want to see what the majority of my web visitors see when they visit my site. I do have to admit, I don't like viewing my screen at 800 x 600 because I am not big on the idea of "Scrolling". When I am not designing webpages, my screen resolution is at 1024 x 768.

    Now, you answer your question: Yes, there are a lot of visitors out there that uses 800 x 600 resolution. The reason being... there are many reasons. For example, I have a very crisp, clear screen (IBM monitor). It is not the largest monitor on the market but it does a really good displaying job. Now, I have a friend with an up-to-date computer and his monitor looks really good except when he make the screen resolution higher than 800 x 600. Anything higher than 800 x 600 on his monitors looks somewhat "fuzzy" and "blury". On his monitor you can see everything you need to see, perfectly but, small text is somewhat not viewable. And you know, there are a lot of webmasters out there that design their webpages using small text. Also, you have to remember, there are a lot of people using "small display monitors". Not everyone has the money or desk space to buy a 20 inch monitor. Therefore using a small monitor, they have no choice but to use 800 x 600. Every monitors "Back Light" shines differently also, some are brighter than others. That has an affect on display resolutions also.

    Just remember, there are a lot monitor manufacturers out in the world, and they all don't use the same monitor confgurations.

    -Hope that asnwers your question.

  4. #29
    Yugo full of anvils bronze trophy hillsy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    :noitacoL
    Posts
    1,859
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I try to design for 800 x 600, or at least so that a 1024 site will degrade well to the lower resolution.

    Tip: I have two monitors hooked to my PC. My primary is a 19" @ 1024 x 768 (could go higher, but I like to see what I'm typing). The secondary is an old 15" @ 800 x 600. Very useful for resolution checking - just open a browser on the lower resolution screen and see how it looks
    that's me!
    Now A Pom. And a Plone Nut
    Broccoli Martinez Airpark

  5. #30
    SitePoint Enthusiast KennyM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    BC Canada
    Posts
    50
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Another reason for 800X600

    The majority of surfers are still connected by dialup. Surfing at a higher resolution slows up the process. And the graphics are mosty banner ads anyway.

    Except for doing offline graphic applications 800X600 looks pretty good to me.

  6. #31
    Yugo full of anvils bronze trophy hillsy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    :noitacoL
    Posts
    1,859
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    How does surfing @ a higher resolution slow things down?
    that's me!
    Now A Pom. And a Plone Nut
    Broccoli Martinez Airpark

  7. #32
    SitePoint Enthusiast KennyM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    BC Canada
    Posts
    50
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    By placing the graphics on your monitor? I thought it would be the same as running a large graphic in a graphic application. I found that lowering the resolution in very large Autocad file made things work a lot faster. Could be wrong about downloading pages tho!

  8. #33
    SitePoint Evangelist
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    598
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I still use 800x600 and design all my sites to that resolution. Why?

    most people use at least 800x600

    most major site design for this resolution as well.

    why is that?

    do they know something more than we do?

  9. #34
    + platinum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Adelaide, Australia
    Posts
    6,441
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Originally posted by KennyM
    By placing the graphics on your monitor? I thought it would be the same as running a large graphic in a graphic application. I found that lowering the resolution in very large Autocad file made things work a lot faster. Could be wrong about downloading pages tho!
    Well right in a way, If you have a massive dynamic flash page running, it will slow ya computer right down (tell me about it ) but if your only adding a couple of hundred pixels either way, with a tiny little gif/jpg/png image, that sorta thing you wouldn't even notice.

  10. #35
    SitePoint Zealot
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Nanaimo, BC, Canada
    Posts
    129
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I can't stand using a low resolution now that I'm used to using my 19" moniters at 1600x1200 resolution....

    I used to design my sites for 640x400... but that makes it worse for the other 95% of the viewers.... most of the time I try to make sites just take up 100% of the screen so that you get whatever the size of your window is.

  11. #36
    SitePoint Guru nagrom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Western CT, USA
    Posts
    803
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    If printability is an issue, then your stuck around 600! I personally have switched to using stretchy tables, so it fits no matter, with the minimum size being around 600 wide (that means horizontal graphics can't total greater than 600 pixels).
    Why you ask? I had a client recently that exploded at the end of a project, because his site (designed at 720 pixels wide, fixed - not stretchy) cut off the right -hand inch when he printed. It was his site, and it REALLY mattered to him. I've since started asking clients in the biginnning if they care how it prints, and guess what! MOST DO! Especially the middle-aged to older crowd (who pay the best).
    So, if you want to make sure it prints OK out of their $100 epson through AOL, using stretchy tables is the answer.
    Also, all the people I know that use big monitors, (like myself) don't actually surf full screen anyway. I tend to open up a couple of windows, probably 900 pixels wide each.

  12. #37
    + platinum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Adelaide, Australia
    Posts
    6,441
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    That is why server-side languages are so good

    "Click here for a printable page"

  13. #38
    Net Senior Citizen tommatthews's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Sydney Australia
    Posts
    869
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Originally posted by Wbmstr84
    I still use 800x600 and design all my sites to that resolution. Why?

    most people use at least 800x600

    most major site design for this resolution as well.

    why is that?

    do they know something more than we do?
    Most new computers come pre-set at 800x600 and most newbies wouldn't know you can change the resolution.
    When I am setting up a new computer I show the user the difference and ask them which they prefer and most pick 1024x768.


    affordable website design

    :: sydney australia ::

  14. #39
    SitePoint Evangelist tdevil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    441
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Originally posted by UTGraeme

    I used to design my sites for 640x400... but that makes it worse for the other 95% of the viewers.... most of the time I try to make sites just take up 100% of the screen so that you get whatever the size of your window is.
    95%?????

    800x600 158735 61.99%

    640x480 45212 17.65%

    Other 28169 11.00%

    1024x768 21866 8.53%

    1152x864 1040 0.40%

    1280x1024 930 0.36%

    1600x1200 100 0.03%

  15. #40
    K, Dan K Dan_K's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Perth - Western Australia
    Posts
    475
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    my Laptop wont let me go any higher than 600x800. if i put it up the whole screen does that scolling thing its really anoying so i just use 600x800.

    Is it possible to stop the screen from scolling on larger resolutions???

    -Dan
    -Daniel Kerton,
    Humor

  16. #41
    SitePoint Addict
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Nottingham, England.
    Posts
    209
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The screen looks funny if I go any lower than 1024x786. The laptop is just weird.

    But have been designing on 8X6 and for that resolution, I still find myself adjusting to 8X6 in photoshop. Shrug, it is a matter preference. For people who do it for personal reasons and not from the commercial standpoint.
    Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

  17. #42
    Skills to Pay the Bills Sparkie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    A cave with 47 computers and an internet feed
    Posts
    3,559
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I use 800x600, and I design sites with it in mind.
    Sherice Jacob - Web Improvement Expert
    Improve Website Conversions | eBook Covers
    Follow Me on Twitter!

  18. #43
    SitePoint Guru
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Long Island, NY
    Posts
    755
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The person who mentioned that many people don't have room for a larger than 17 inch monitor made a very important point. I use 1024x768 at work, so that I can see what a significant portion of users are seeing, but it's a strain and I need to wear glasses for most of the type. Not the same glasses that I wear for reading small print, either, because those are too strong for the computer. How many people would bother with that? So, at home, where a number of different people use the computer, it's set to 800x600. We'd need at least a 19 inch monitor for everyone to be comfortable reading the screen in a larger resolution - and we don't really have room for that. We'd at least need a different computer desk. I think that 800x600 is going to be around for quite a while.

    Also, I think it makes a pretty bad impression when you try to view a site in 800x600 and it doesn't fit. Makes it seem unprofessional at the least.

  19. #44
    SitePoint Zealot Megs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Kitchener, Ontario
    Posts
    179
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Originally posted by LadyLily


    Very true. I would put my screen to a higher reslotion, but my sibling and mother would go crazy and want me to set it back. These are the real audience, the "stupid" people. I have to see what they see and what they would do. That is the ultimate goal, to make it easy for the dumest person on the lowest resolution. Well, you get what I mean.
    Okay, so people who run at lower then 1024 are now the stupid ones. That's rediculous. Really, I can't beleive the arrogance shown in a number of these posts - to think that as a designer you can dictate the preferences of your users. This "I'm right, you're wrong", "I'm smart, you're dumb" way of thinking disgusts me.

    I agree with everything that Creole has said and I also agree with allie who said that most people are just more comfortable at 800 x 600. It's easiest on the eyes and when you're not using a lot of graphics programs there's really no need to move up your resolution. Yeah, you could get a bigger monitor but I also think that most people don't want a big huge monitor taking up their whole desk. Not necessary when all you're doing is a little e-mail and web surfing. It's like the difference between a 52" television and a 27" - you may think the larger screen is better, so why doesn't everyone get one? Many people just don't see the need to justify that kind of expense, some wouldn't have the physical space for it, others are perfectly happy with 27". Is someone dumb for not getting a 52" TV? Of course not.

    Personally I don't think there's anything wrong with using the settings that are most convenient for you rather than upgrading to some unnecessary standard dictated by the tech-savvy.
    Megan Jack
    Proud to be Canadian
    http://www.meganjack.com
    Moderator at The Webmaster Forums and EDevCafe Forums

  20. #45
    SitePoint Addict zoordaan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    NYC/Texas
    Posts
    348
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    In terms of designing sites I usually try to keep the width within 800. But I don't try to get everything to fit 600 in height, just the most important parts of my page.

    find more sites now that are designed for larger resolutions and that makes me happy because I prefer sites not designed for 800X600, as long as the designer didn't use a font that's too small.

  21. #46
    Tenacious T Tyhe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Hilversum
    Posts
    651
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Okay, so people who run at lower then 1024 are now the stupid ones. That's rediculous. Really, I can't beleive the arrogance shown in a number of these posts - to think that as a designer you can dictate the preferences of your users. This "I'm right, you're wrong", "I'm smart, you're dumb" way of thinking disgusts me.
    Megs,

    It wasn't my intention to start a post that would turn into bashing people, I was just curious about the settings of other designers.

    People are free to choose what they like and an important fact is that some people can't afford a bigger screen and thus a bigger resolution.

    The only thing I can add is that although not all people who have a low resolution are dumb, it is true that many dumb people have a low resolution.
    That's all folks...

  22. #47
    + platinum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Adelaide, Australia
    Posts
    6,441
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The main reason people won't adjust their res. is simply cos they don't see anything wrong with what they've got... they simply are happy with what it is, and don't see the need to change it.

    I know when my parents bought our first computer, it was at 640 x 480 for ages, then i set it at 800 x 600 one day, since that is what I prefered, but they hated it and wanted me to change it back. (don't worry, later on I installed win98 and told them that you couldn't go any lower because of the 'upgrade')

    Since 17" moniter have only just become the standard over the past year or so, most people would still be using a 15" or so, which I could not stand using anthing except 800 x 600, IMO each size moniter has it's own res. that looks good on it...

  23. #48
    Tenacious T Tyhe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Hilversum
    Posts
    651
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I think people that are now using 800 x 600 will get used to 1024 if they were to try it...

    BTW: changed my design so that it's compatible for 800 x 600, so i guess some people did influence me!



    Greetz.
    That's all folks...

  24. #49
    What? Maelstrom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Whistler BC originally from Guelph Ontario
    Posts
    2,175
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Originally posted by Tyhe
    I think people that are now using 800 x 600 will get used to 1024 if they were to try it...

    BTW: changed my design so that it's compatible for 800 x 600, so i guess some people did influence me!



    Greetz.
    I would like to say thanx. As for getting used to it. I am not too sure a lot of screens no matter the quality (except for lcd) have a small almost unoticable 'blur' which some people are really sensitive to. Same sensitivity for people that hate flourescent lights. It can't be helped just in their eyes. (causing some serious migranes)
    Maelstrom Personal - Apparition Visions
    Development - PhP || Mysql || Zend || Devshed
    Unix - FreeBSD || FreeBsdForums || Man Pages
    They made me a sitepoint Mentor - Feel free to PM me or Email me and I will see if I can help.

  25. #50
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    8
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I use 1024 x 768, I couldn't stand trying to work in anything lower. I always check my sites at 800 x 600 though, to make sure everything doesn't fall apart at that resolution.

    If most people still use 800 x 600 we should design for 800 x 600. It seems pointless to spend ages building a site that a lot of visitors will end up being unable to see properly, IMO. Kind of negates all the hard work put into building the thing.

    Just my 2 cents on the matter.


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
  •