website width?

[LuckyTaxi]

is 800x600 still the normal? some of the most well-designed and well-known sites (blogs) are made for 1024x768. This has me wondering, should I just ignore the 800x600 crowd? what are your thoughts?

 

[purbeast0]

just make it stretch the window size, problem solved

 

[toekramp]

screw teh 800x600 crowd

 

[JRock]

Originally posted by: purbeast0
just make it stretch the window size, problem solved

Agreed.
Set the Table Width to 100% so it stretches with the window.

 

[SarcasticDwarf]

Originally posted by: JRock

Originally posted by: purbeast0
just make it stretch the window size, problem solved

Agreed.
Set the Table Width to 100% so it stretches with the window.

Actually, you should probably be using CSS by now instead of tables where possible.

 

[LuckyTaxi]

Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf

Originally posted by: JRock

Originally posted by: purbeast0
just make it stretch the window size, problem solved

Agreed.
Set the Table Width to 100% so it stretches with the window.

Actually, you should probably be using CSS by now instead of tables where possible.

Yes, I'm using CSS and I'm setting the width to a fix size.
I think I'm gonna ignore the 800x600 crowd. There are sites that use CSS and they have basically ignored the IE crowd.

 

[Kelemvor]

Originally posted by: lilcam

Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf

Originally posted by: JRock

Originally posted by: purbeast0
just make it stretch the window size, problem solved

Agreed.
Set the Table Width to 100% so it stretches with the window.

Actually, you should probably be using CSS by now instead of tables where possible.

Yes, I'm using CSS and I'm setting the width to a fix size.
I think I'm gonna ignore the 800x600 crowd. There are sites that use CSS and they have basically ignored the IE crowd.

Sites that have a fixed width look like they are designed by someone too stupid to figure out how to build a nice site the scales.

Nothing worse than having literally half your screen go wasted because some idiot made a 800x600 site that I have to view on my 1280x1024 setup.

 

[Aves]

Originally posted by: purbeast0
just make it stretch the window size, problem solved

I wish this site would do that. It looks ridiculous on my widescreen LCD.

 

[DougK62]

Originally posted by: lilcam

Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf

Originally posted by: JRock

Originally posted by: purbeast0
just make it stretch the window size, problem solved

Agreed.
Set the Table Width to 100% so it stretches with the window.

Actually, you should probably be using CSS by now instead of tables where possible.

Yes, I'm using CSS and I'm setting the width to a fix size.
I think I'm gonna ignore the 800x600 crowd. There are sites that use CSS and they have basically ignored the IE crowd.

I doubt they're ignoring the IE crowd. IE just doesn't follow standards for CSS -- just like they don't for so many things.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: FrankyJunior

Originally posted by: lilcam

Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf

Originally posted by: JRock

Originally posted by: purbeast0
just make it stretch the window size, problem solved

Agreed.
Set the Table Width to 100% so it stretches with the window.

Actually, you should probably be using CSS by now instead of tables where possible.

Yes, I'm using CSS and I'm setting the width to a fix size.
I think I'm gonna ignore the 800x600 crowd. There are sites that use CSS and they have basically ignored the IE crowd.

Sites that have a fixed width look like they are designed by someone too stupid to figure out how to build a nice site the scales.

Nothing worse than having literally half your screen go wasted because some idiot made a 800x600 site that I have to view on my 1280x1024 setup.

No, they're designed by people who want to have more control over how their website looks. And it's very, very common.

 

[George P Burdell]

Depends.... if you're going with a three-column layout, screw the 800x600 crowd. If you're with a two-column layout, you could cater to the 800x600 crowd.

If you don't want your website looking weird at higher resolutions, make your layout stretch the entire width (or a percentage, like 80% width) of the window.

 

[EGGO]

I catered mine to 800 x 600 just because I know a few people who are still at that resolution.

Unless you're using an image in the table that you want to govern the width, like mine, for example, then stretch it.

 

[Kyteland]

No love for the 320x240 crowd?

The QVGA screen on my phone doesn't like sites that design for large monitors, but nobody ever thinks to provide an alternative.

 

[George P Burdell]

Originally posted by: Kyteland
No love for the 320x240 crowd?

The QVGA screen on my phone doesn't like sites that design for large monitors, but nobody ever thinks to provide an alternative.

some people do... CSS is helpful in this matter.

 

[amdskip]

Anyone have a good guide for CSS beginners?

 

[George P Burdell]

Originally posted by: amdskip
Anyone have a good guide for CSS beginners?

http://www.cssbasics.com/

 

[Mark R]

HTML is a markup language (i.e. it gives hints on how to display a page, but the actual layout should be left up the reader). This is in contrast to PDF which is a page layout language (it gives the author total control of layout).

Using fixed width layouts is contrary to the whole concept of HTML, which is that the reader should have full control of the display. Unfortunately, the bad practice of fixed widths has become quite common - partly driven by the fact that IE has had serious problems with correct layouts.

Readers may use 640x480 (because they have a pocket PC, or have poor vision) or they may use 2560x1600 because they are a power user who likes to get an overview of a document. Using a fixed width will compromise the experience for one or both of these groups.