UnXpected
Joined: 19 Aug 2004
Posts: 58
|
I have more than 70% of my user using 1024x768.
I believe most design for this.
|
Fri Oct 29, 2004 5:31 pm
|
|
|
Thermit
Site Admin
Joined: 11 Aug 2004
Posts: 272
|
That's probably a good compromise, UnXpected.
Are those stats based on a poll or from your server logs?
|
|
Fri Oct 29, 2004 5:41 pm
|
|
|
UnXpected
Joined: 19 Aug 2004
Posts: 58
|
from my Stats 
|
|
Fri Oct 29, 2004 7:32 pm
|
|
|
Thermit
Site Admin
Joined: 11 Aug 2004
Posts: 272
|
Well, that's a positive stat from my perspective. I want people to move on from these tiny 800x600 screens!
|
|
Fri Oct 29, 2004 8:13 pm
|
|
|
Euler
Joined: 02 Sep 2004
Posts: 109
|
|
|
|
Think again guys. Low res is here to stay. You best find a way to handle it gracefully.
Businesses are in a state of constant cash crunch. Big sexy monitors are considered frivolous expenses. Therefore I have users at 640x480 on LCD screens. It doesn't bother me a bit. It's not difficult to build a flexible layout.
It all depends upon who your user is:
Leisure users typically have much larger screens because they are easily duped by salesmen into buying more hardware than they need.
Business users typically have to put up with older hardware that only gets replaced when it utterly fails. And it gets replaced by more cheap shit.
Older users (yes, old people use the internet too) have vision issues that force them to use low-res to solve the font-size problem. You see, in reality, Microsoft sucks because after 15 years of hawking 40 year old technology, they still ignore people with vision problems.
Have you ever watched someone use windows with bifocals? Have you ever forced yourself to use MS's "extra large fonts" feature? It's fucked. Works about 30% of the time. So, instead of getting nice resolutions with large fonts (best of both worlds), vision-impaired (remember that's ALL old people) are forced to set their monitors to 640x480. Thanks MS!
Also don't forget that many people never change their default resolution from the factory. They don't know how. They don't know it's possible. If you show them, they get worried and ask you to "put it back".
If you really think about it, some users are "stuck" with 160X160! PalmOS users. Heheh.
BOTTOMLINE:
It's a mistake to view screen res as a natural evolution from low to high over time. For many applications, it makes sense to stay low. Many reasons, price, health, corporate incompetency, battery life, ignorance. These things will not change in our lifetimes.
So it's best to bring your content to ALL resolutions, sizes and shapes. Otherwise you are only alienating people and closing doors.
|
|
Fri Oct 29, 2004 8:37 pm
|
|
|
Euler
Joined: 02 Sep 2004
Posts: 109
|
I lied when I said it doesn't bother me a bit. I meant that my site can handle that res.
Whenever I encounter a client with a low res I get a sinking feeling because I know that client might never experience how great everything is supposed to look. They'll just continue to scroll forever in this cramped little postage stamp.
I never suggest a higher res until I really know it won't scare the user.
oop gotta run again!
|
|
Fri Oct 29, 2004 9:08 pm
|
|
|
magoo
Joined: 11 Dec 2004
Posts: 14
|
I always double check that everything looks OK on 600 by 800 but any lower I really don't worry about. I'm sure there are people using the really old screens but the target audience for my site is younger people and I'm hoping that they all have decent monitors and decent connections. One thing I do make sure of is that it works on every Browser. I use firefox and I'm often surprised by how different thing look on other browsers
|
|
Sun Dec 19, 2004 2:15 am
|
|
|
FiveStar
Joined: 17 Dec 2004
Posts: 25
|
I do my development useing IE6.
I usually check every website i make on multiple Resolutions, and on 2 browsers, IE and Netscape, im sometimes surprised to see the difference in netscape after the website is complete !!
Its always better to check by changing the res from 640x480 to highest posible and EVEN change browsers along with the res.
|
|
Mon Dec 20, 2004 9:48 am
|
|
|
Thermit
Site Admin
Joined: 11 Aug 2004
Posts: 272
|
Yep. Netscape is a good check. IE is very forgiving, it will let you do things that aren't right and the page will still look fine, but if the slightest thing is wrong, NS will upchuck your page.
|
|
Mon Dec 20, 2004 10:14 pm
|
|
|
Euler
Joined: 02 Sep 2004
Posts: 109
|
Talk about upchucking a page, I checked a recent CSS-validating page of mine in Mac IE. Talk about a comedy of errors! I felt like my page was in a Monty Python skit! "Hello, whot's all this then?"
MS's IE browser group is the Spinal Tap of software teams. They celebrate mediocrity with a rare and hilarious enthusiasm. Oh but look, the next IE is going to have popup blocking! "Right then!" *laff track*
|
|
Mon Apr 04, 2005 10:19 pm
|
|
|
Thermit
Site Admin
Joined: 11 Aug 2004
Posts: 272
|
The fox is eating Exploder share left and right.
|
|
Tue Apr 05, 2005 7:26 am
|
|
|
Orion
Joined: 31 Mar 2005
Posts: 11
Location: Brisbane, Queensland, Australia |
I just have to add a little hear. All my sites are built (due to the way the scripts i use work) to adjust to the screen or will fit perfectly on a 800x 600 resolution.
There is absolutly no use in designing for a screen size smaller then this unless you know your main user group will be older people or people with smaller screens.
I go into design assuming a minimum resolution of 800 x 600. Which is Achivable on every LCD monitor 15" and above that is currently available. If you computer is showing less then 800 x 600 on an LCD and it looks bad quality go and check your display settings because i can almost gaurentee if the comptuer is set up correctly it will be able to at least make it to 800 x 600 if not 1024 x 768(although may be a bit small on 15") The picture quality should be better then 640 x 480 as well.
|
|
Tue Apr 12, 2005 6:40 am
|
|
|
 
|
|
Goto page
1, 2 Next
All times are GMT. The time now is Sat May 19, 2012 7:56 am
|
|
|
|
| |
