SitePoint Sponsor

User Tag List

Results 1 to 8 of 8
  1. #1
    SitePoint Zealot
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    Port Jervis, NY, US
    Posts
    163
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I am curious where most webmasters stand today on the use of DHTML, Layers, and allowance for 640 x 480 screen resolution. I don't know where there is open access to the best Internet statistics, but from what I have seen less than 10% of all people use browsers below 4x, and somewhere around 10% of all people use a 640 x 480 monitor resolution. I can't vouch for their accuracy, but I don't think they are too far off. Granted, Netscape 4.x is hardly state of the art in regards to DHTML, etc., but at least the technology is somewhat usable.

    Does everyone feel comfortable yet with using DHTML, Layers, and allowing a horizontal scroll bar for screen resolutions less than 800 x 600? So far I have been quite conservative in designing web sites, but I am wondering how much longer I will remain so. At the very least, I suspect that by January & February of 2001, after the latest round of Christmas computer purchases, the number of individuals who won't have at least a 4.x browser (and better, a 5.x browser) and 800 x 600 screen resolution will be negligible, and at the very least they will probably be used to seeing the horizontal screen bar. I'm seeing them now at 800 x 600, and even at places like Infoseek!

    Who has made the jump, and if not, when do you think that you'll make it?

  2. #2
    SitePoint Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Palo Alto, CA
    Posts
    87
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    yes, im agree. I dont use 640x480 "standard" anymore. You have to look at ur website, what kind of people will visit it, if for example its a web for designers, there you can be pretty sure that they will have at least 8x6 screen (mostly more than that),
    if its web-site for webmasters, its about same. If its yah@@ like site, then probably itll be little of people that use less then 8x6 screen.
    Netscape.com (havy traffic) uses 8x6 screen as ive seen.
    In a while itll be hard to find 'normal' user with screen 640x480. (maybe some pro. guys or so...).
    about layers: http://buybrand.com/projects/ncs/
    lotsa layers and sound and flash blannanana


  3. #3
    Your Lord and Master, Foamy gold trophy Hierophant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Lancaster, Ca. USA
    Posts
    12,305
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote/font><HR>
    In a while itll be hard to find 'normal' user with screen 640x480. (maybe some pro. guys or so...).
    <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Actually screens will be getting smaller not larger in the short run. With WebTV (544 X 392), The soon to be released AOLTV, Dreamcast and Playstation. Not to mention Windows CE devices, cell phones and Palm devices. It is expected that in 5 years there will be 2 billion of these devices accessing the Internet on a daily basis. My feeling is go ahead and code for your high resolutions within the next year you will either be redesigning for lower resolutions or passed up by the competition.

    This is not to say that you can't design a good layout that works in the majority of resolutions available, it is just a little harder to do so.

    ------------------
    Wayne Luke - Sitepoint Moderator/Internet Media Developer
    Digital Magician Studios - Making Magic with Web Applications
    wluke@digitalmagician.com

    [This message has been edited by wluke (edited June 22, 2000).]

  4. #4
    SitePoint Zealot
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    Port Jervis, NY, US
    Posts
    163
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    My parents use WebTV, and it is terrible. Very clumsy to use without a mouse, with lousy image quality to boot. I'm sorry they wasted the money on it. I could be wrong, but I don't think Internet appliances will have quite the impact that many people are expecting of them, not even the upcoming X Box from Microsoft. At one time, I thought they represented a big part of the future as well.

    The PC mainframe-on-a-desktop model has been criticized relentlessly by many over the years, but it remains the most adaptable one yet devised. Internet appliances can not begin to take on the functions of a regular PC, and with PCs getting cheaper and cheaper over time...

    Even if they were to get popular, and it were worthwhile to design for them (for one thing, I imagine Internet appliance users would have a disproportionately low tendency to make use of e-commerce, as it is genuinely tedious with something like WebTV), the criteria is somewhat different than designing for 640 x 480. It has more to do with layout than absolute size of your tables and images...though I am hardly an expert here!

    But that is just my opinion, and I appreciate your input. Thank you.

  5. #5
    SitePoint Wizard
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    2,629
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I make it a personal goal for all of my pages to be displayed perfectly under 600 pixels wide and above. Too many people are still at 640x480 that it's just not worth it to leave them alone. Even if less than 10% of people are at low resolutions, it's still about 1 out of every 10 visitors.

    Go for the lowest common denominator.

  6. #6
    Confirmed Halfwit
    Join Date
    Oct 1999
    Location
    Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts
    983
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Hmmm...

    As mentioned in the easlier post, I think the website resolution absolutely depends on the subject matter of your site.

    For example, if you have a website that is aimed at selling real estate.. it's unlikely someone will access it via a wireless palm pilot or cell-phone browser. The information on your site would simply overwhelm the users ability to use it effectively.

    However, if your site is a "joke of the day" type site... you should consider that most wireless visitors to your site would just be passing time while at the airport or in a cab... they will expect your site to be accessable, although modified to "get to the point" with some brevity of information. (ie: the wireless version of your site would simply display one joke at a time, not a whole pageload of stuff.)

    As we saw in the "old days" with various site versions for netscape & ie... we'll now have versions for WebTV, Dreamcast, cell phones, palm pilots, various resolutions, and whatever else comes along.

    It would be nice to be able to design a site that is dynamically "scallable" to any resolution size. The coding requirements would have an added benefit of reducing the number of crappy website designers, too.


  7. #7
    Your Lord and Master, Foamy gold trophy Hierophant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Lancaster, Ca. USA
    Posts
    12,305
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I am modifying my page so that it fits in resolutions ranging as low as 400 pixels wide and as large as 1600. Further once the page is online, I will be converting the entire system to WML and making it WAP capable for mobile access. I personally see this as an important requirement of universal access. I see it as a personal requirement of my own career advancement.

    ------------------
    Wayne Luke - Sitepoint Moderator/Internet Media Developer
    Digital Magician Studios - Making Magic with Web Applications
    wluke@digitalmagician.com

  8. #8
    Your Lord and Master, Foamy gold trophy Hierophant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Lancaster, Ca. USA
    Posts
    12,305
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Personally I would much rather be able to access Homesales, reviews and information like that rather than jokes from my cell phone.

    And coding for a large variety of resolutions is relatively easy. All you need is a little javascript and a flexible layout. Its made even easier using BrowserHawk.

    ------------------
    Wayne Luke - Sitepoint Moderator/Internet Media Developer
    Digital Magician Studios - Making Magic with Web Applications
    wluke@digitalmagician.com


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
  •