OAC
Staff
Joined: Jan 25, 2001
# Posts: 6805
|
Posted: 2003-Feb-04 03:59
The most popular screen resolutions on the web in the world are:?
?
1. 1024 x 768 46.1%
2. 800 x 600 34.3%
3. 1280 x 1024 13.1%
4. 1152 x 864 3.9%
5. 640 x 480 1.1%
6. 1600 x 1200 1%
7. 1152 x 870 0.2%
Source: http://www.onestat.com/html/aboutus_pressbox14.html November 11 2002
With 64.6% of Internet users now using 1024 x 768 or greater, it must be getting close to move from 800 x 600 pages to 1024 x 768?
What do you think?
|
 |
Curt
Joined: Eons Ago
# Posts: 3735
|
Posted: 2003-Feb-04 09:14
Keep designing for pages with widths of 800 pixels wide. I don't like to have to fill my entire screen with a browser window--like some room to see my desktop for access to desktop icons while I surf.
How many of you size your browser windows down so that either the left size or the right size of the browser does not cover the whole desktop?
1152 x 864 = 3.9%, haha that's me for the past 4 years :D. Once you go big you can't go back.
1152 x 870 = 0.2%, who would have that sort of setting--seems odd.
|
|
Curt
Joined: Eons Ago
# Posts: 3735
|
Posted: 2003-Feb-04 09:15
http://www.onestat.com/html/aboutus_pressbox14.html
It won't automatically link up for you.
|
|
Curt
Joined: Eons Ago
# Posts: 3735
|
Posted: 2003-Feb-04 09:19
Just realized, we don't have the big smiley for this --> 
|
|
OAC
Staff
Joined: Jan 25, 2001
# Posts: 6805
|
Posted: 2003-Feb-04 11:52
Thanks Curt 
|
|
xelA
Joined: Nov 24, 1999
# Posts: 1857
|
Posted: 2003-Feb-05 00:26
Personally, I'm starting do design sites with 1024x768 in mind and at the sime time have these site be able to "gracefully degrade" in 800x600 resolutions. My friend just bought a notebook this weekend that was preset to 1280 res. ...just soemthing to think about.
|
|
Curt
Joined: Eons Ago
# Posts: 3735
|
Posted: 2003-Feb-05 04:32
What about people who don't want the browser to fill the whole screen? There are a sizeable number of people who surf like that when they have 19 to 21 inch monitors. When I worked at Motorola, many of the engineers would reserve about 25% or so width of the screen real estate to view the rest of the desktop. I don't like being forced to maximize the browser width to keep the sideways scrolling from happening.
The main reason people use the entire screen to surf was because their monitors were small. 19 and 21 inch monitors are much cheaper now and people do not necessarily want their whole screen to be used width-wise.
|
|
Curt
Joined: Eons Ago
# Posts: 3735
|
Posted: 2003-Feb-05 04:35
When you reduce the width of the browser window 20% from 1024 pixels, you arrive approx. at 800 pixels wide and if the page is designed for 800 x 600, it fits very well.
|
|
xelA
Joined: Nov 24, 1999
# Posts: 1857
|
Posted: 2003-Feb-05 21:51
Curt, I agree with what you're saying. I think that there can be such a thing as information overload. I thinkit's up to us as designers to figure out what a good place to STOP is for that particular design. I mean if you see that things are getting cluttered and it's hard for the eye to focus then you're obviously breaking a major rule as a designer. So, if we stick to what we know from art 101 it shouldn't pose too much of a problem.
What do you think?
|
|
Curt
Joined: Eons Ago
# Posts: 3735
|
Posted: 2003-Feb-05 22:37
Yep, just wanted to remind people who rely on stats to remember that Monitor resolutions don't always tell the truth about true browser pixel widths for people who resize the browser to fit their own purposes. It's easy to get caught up in raw stats and draw premature conclusions. 800 pixel width is a comfortable dimension for all-around good design size.
|
|
excell
Staff
Joined: Mar 19, 2001
# Posts: 14512
|
Posted: 2003-Feb-06 14:53
Yes, I am sticking to 800 as a maximum (well and minimum too bad for the 640 res.. it is just too hard!) and ensuring that those that with larger resolution are looked after either with fixed table or good "floating" expansion.
It is truely horrible to see some of my early designs these days.. *shudder*
|
|
Curt
Joined: Eons Ago
# Posts: 3735
|
Posted: 2003-Feb-06 19:29
640 px width was always hard to design for. It didn't give you much width to work with to include vertical menus and content--sorta squished everything. 800 px width is a comfortable width.
|
|
xelA
Joined: Nov 24, 1999
# Posts: 1857
|
Posted: 2003-Feb-06 20:17
I'm actually working with one right now that's 900 in width total (pretty weird huh) but it will run across the screen and make the site look like wide screen tv. The cool thing is that you can still see it resized and in fullscreen you get some cool colors to see.
[ Message was edited by: xelA 02/06/2003 02:17 pm ]
|
|
excell
Staff
Joined: Mar 19, 2001
# Posts: 14512
|
Posted: 2003-Feb-15 13:26
Can I see a preview of that one please xelA.?
|
|
bhartzer
Staff
Joined: Jun 08, 2000
# Posts: 7042
|
Posted: 2003-Feb-15 16:18
I would design it for your visitors. If have access to your stats, then take a look at what screen size the visitors to your site are using and design for them.
|
|
excell
Staff
Joined: Mar 19, 2001
# Posts: 14512
|
Posted: 2003-Feb-15 16:54
aww, but.. hey that is a little *general* I think the variables are hugely a challenge right now.. when visitors ca be from a wide spectrum.
Sure if you have a target niche and they all happen to be doing the same thing .. that is great..
But in my experience, at the moment the audience is quite wide.. as in screen resolution.. so the question remains .. what is the *average* or *accepted* width that most are designing for?
I say 800.. with expansion gracefully.. less.. forget it. they can go get a new system
most I think.. have got the hang of things on a wider screen and are enjoying multiple windows etc.
|
|
crash
Staff
Joined: Dec 02, 2003
# Posts: 10626
|
Posted: 2003-Feb-28 18:45
I prefer to keep the design fluid (tho it's not always an option) so it doesn't matter what res or screen or browser size it's being viewed on.
I'm one of those that rarely expands the window to the max size then factor in that I like my taskbar on the right (instead of bottom) and generally have Operas 'Hotlist' open - that makes for a pretty small small screen all things considered.
Using this forum as an example - it works fine in 800x600 or 1024x768 
|
|
xelA
Joined: Nov 24, 1999
# Posts: 1857
|
Posted: 2003-Feb-28 20:21
That's actually pretty interesting. It makes me wonder if there is a way to track/recognize visitors who suft with the taskbar on the side.
|
|
crash
Staff
Joined: Dec 02, 2003
# Posts: 10626
|
Posted: 2003-Feb-28 20:48
I don't see how.. it's not attached to the browser so the browser doesn't know.. in reality (I sit at 1024) it takes up just under an inch of space. If your design is fluid it doesn't matter, but sites that require a full screen don't get it and tend to default to a horizontal scroll.. which is annoying.
|
|
crash
Staff
Joined: Dec 02, 2003
# Posts: 10626
|
Posted: 2003-Feb-28 20:50
a thought.. of the sites I manage, some get hardly any 1024's (i tend to think the ones that are there are myself and people checking something for me) while others have it as a majority - i think owners really need to take a look at their actual stats before deciding what res to use and adjust accordingly. Just because the bulk of the internet is at 1024 that doesn't mean your target audience is
|
|
Inbox
