Standard WebPage Size web 2.0

Discussion in 'HTML & Website Design' started by sp2h, Feb 6, 2010.

  1. #1
    Is the standard size for websites web 2.0 now 1024x768 or still 800x600? or any other please suggest
     
    sp2h, Feb 6, 2010 IP
  2. Masteroa

    Masteroa Peon

    Messages:
    54
    Likes Received:
    3
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #2
    Since only 1 percent of all visitors still use a 800x600 resolution, web 2.0 can be designed for visitors using 1024x768 resolution.
     
    Masteroa, Feb 6, 2010 IP
  3. MrKushhy

    MrKushhy Peon

    Messages:
    67
    Likes Received:
    3
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #3
    The standard width for a website should be 960px unless you have a flow style layout
     
    MrKushhy, Feb 6, 2010 IP
  4. sp2h

    sp2h Peon

    Messages:
    189
    Likes Received:
    0
    Best Answers:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #4
    Thanks for your information.. what the highest resolution for the website??? 1280 x 1024 or any other?
     
    sp2h, Feb 6, 2010 IP
  5. deathshadow

    deathshadow Acclaimed Member

    Messages:
    9,732
    Likes Received:
    1,999
    Best Answers:
    253
    Trophy Points:
    515
    #5
    Christmas on a cracker, another of these threads.

    Which is the only type of layout worth doing since given the wide range of screen resolutions that are out there. Fixed width is ALWAYS a miserable /FAIL/ at web design... and it's not like fluid is any harder (Hell, I find it SIMPLER since you don't have to go nuts declaring widths on EVERYTHING)
     
    deathshadow, Feb 6, 2010 IP
  6. xenobiologist

    xenobiologist Active Member

    Messages:
    165
    Likes Received:
    0
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    53
    #6
    I would say that the majority of users now have a screen res of atleast 1024x768. Which you would probably be designing using the 960 based grid, if you design off a grid that is.
     
    xenobiologist, Feb 6, 2010 IP
  7. MrKushhy

    MrKushhy Peon

    Messages:
    67
    Likes Received:
    3
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #7
    Well I wouldnt go that far. there is a higher percentage of people that use fixed layouts and do perfect with it. Flow layouts are nice but you run into issues with IE... as people normally do. The box model for IE is incorrect so when you base everything on a % things could get messy without a fix

    the standard today is 960px
     
    MrKushhy, Feb 6, 2010 IP
  8. Dogs_and_things

    Dogs_and_things Active Member

    Messages:
    97
    Likes Received:
    2
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    55
    #8
    Let me see if I get this right,

    Web 2.0 means that we don´t care anymore about people on low screen resolutions, we just let them scroll the sh*t out of it?
     
    Dogs_and_things, Feb 6, 2010 IP
  9. deathshadow

    deathshadow Acclaimed Member

    Messages:
    9,732
    Likes Received:
    1,999
    Best Answers:
    253
    Trophy Points:
    515
    #9
    Wow, and... Wow...

    IE doesn't have a broken box model in IE6/newer if you bother having a doctype with nothing before the doctype - and if you are worried about the box model in IE 5.x or 6 without a doctype, if you just remember to never declare width the same time as padding/border, you'll be fine. USUALLY when people have layout issues in IE it's either easily fixed by throwing haslayout at the elements parent or display:inline at a float, or the fault of the designer for trying to do things in a way well known not to work cross browser in the first place. More common is people declaring widths on every damned element for no good reason instead of just letting block level or display:block elements do their thing.

    But then I find it easier when someone 'demands' a fixed width layout to design it fluid and then constrain it in a single div. Fluid is the natural behavior of HTML - what the **** is so hard about that? FIXED is the hard part, overcomplicating something simple - unless of course you've got some art *** breathing down your neck about being pixel perfect to their goof assed PSD that doesn't even take accessibility into account.

    Ah, so I see you've bought a netbook? ;)
     
    deathshadow, Feb 6, 2010 IP
  10. Dogs_and_things

    Dogs_and_things Active Member

    Messages:
    97
    Likes Received:
    2
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    55
    #10
    No, not yet,

    But I use Analytics, and from the data I find there free of charge I can tell that a for me considerable number of my visitors is still on 800x600.

    Which means those clay table starers will get scrollin' disease if I set my fixed width to anything over 800px.

    Yes, I wish I had chosen for a fluid layout when I rebuild my site, but I didn´t, so for the time being I prefer to set my width to under 800px.
     
    Dogs_and_things, Feb 6, 2010 IP