Jump to content


Photo

1024 x 768


  • Please log in to reply
8 replies to this topic

#1 otuatail

otuatail
  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • Advanced Member
  • 960 posts

Posted 23 May 2006 - 11:11 AM

I have been asked to develop pages using 800 x 600. Is still a problem in 2006. Is there a way of
getting this information from the users browsers and creating a log?


Desmond.


#2 Kris

Kris
  • Staff Alumni
  • Advanced Member
  • 2,755 posts
  • LocationThe Internet

Posted 23 May 2006 - 11:20 AM

Please be aware that the PHP Help forum is for requesting help with scripts that you are writing, not for general questions, so I'll move this over to our Misc forum.

With regards to your question, I personally don't really design things for a minimum of 800x600 any more. I've stepped my minimum up to 1024x768, I'd expect the 800x600 number are dropping by the day by now. I think you can grab the users screen resolution with a bit of JavaScript, although I can't remember what it is off the top of my head.

#3 ober

ober
  • Staff Alumni
  • Advanced Member
  • 5,337 posts
  • LocationEast Coast, USA

Posted 23 May 2006 - 12:53 PM

You should still program for 800x600. There are still an amazingly large amount of users running that resolution, unfortunately. I have, however, seen a trend of web designers moving to a 1024x768.

[a href=\"http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp\" target=\"_blank\"]http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp[/a]

Info: PHP Manual


#4 Kris

Kris
  • Staff Alumni
  • Advanced Member
  • 2,755 posts
  • LocationThe Internet

Posted 23 May 2006 - 01:06 PM

Thanks for the link Ober, interesting stuff. Although, something to consider is your target audience, this can make a difference - If you're designing a site about computer games, it's very likely that the target audience will generally be running their res over 1024x768. In the other direction, if it's a news site, it could be anyone viewing it and therefore 800x600 is probably a fair consideration.

Personally, I say screw them. The more sites that are built for a minimum of 1024x768, the better the chance these users will upgrade their equipment and get with the times (I mean come on, 800x600 was considered crap 5+ years ago), and then we can all be happy to disregard the need to design for 800x600. Everyone's a winner.

#5 ober

ober
  • Staff Alumni
  • Advanced Member
  • 5,337 posts
  • LocationEast Coast, USA

Posted 23 May 2006 - 01:34 PM

That's true and a very valid point, but some of my sites are for that specific audience that fit into the "older" crowd that don't have the latest in PC technology... people like old folks that are using hand-me-down PCs that their kids gave them. So unfortunately, I still write sites for that resolution.

The other thing that provides is easy printing. You build a site that fits inside a 800x600 resolution and you're building a site that requires no changes for printing.

Info: PHP Manual


#6 AndyB

AndyB
  • Staff Alumni
  • Advanced Member
  • 5,465 posts
  • LocationToronto

Posted 23 May 2006 - 02:28 PM

[!--quoteo(post=376287:date=May 23 2006, 07:11 AM:name=otuatail)--][div class=\'quotetop\']QUOTE(otuatail @ May 23 2006, 07:11 AM) View Post[/div][div class=\'quotemain\'][!--quotec--]
I have been asked to develop pages using 800 x 600. [/quote]
Then your course of action is clear. If you do something other than the client specifically requests, what are you going to do when they complain? Redesign for free???

While I have some sympathy for the 'design for current technology', i.e. 1024 and larger, if you pursue that argument designers ought to be creating sites using CSS3 and beyond. The designer's job is to present information (in a useful, visually sensible, manner) so that the maximum number of site visitors 'get the message'. The designer's job is not to use client sites in an attempt to get people to buy new computer hardware (unless that's what the site sells).

A caution about "stats". W3Schools visitors are likely not representative of 'joe surfer' since it's a site where visitor logs would be skewed to developers, coders, etc. most of whom would have modern hardware.

And do remember that it's window width that's important, not resolution. Plenty of large screen users run more than one window open at a time (because they have the screen width/size to do it), so you may well find 1600px capable hardware running a browser window that's 800px (or less) wide.

[a href=\"http://clagnut.com/blog/1663/\" target=\"_blank\"]Clagnut[/a]'s blog has an interesting discussion on 'variable fixed width'. Great CSS exercise! Read some more at [a href=\"http://www.collylogic.com/?/comments/the-importance-of-browser-window-width/\" target=\"_blank\"]CollyLogic[/a].

And do remember that if the client wants 8x6, then give them 8x6.
Legend has it that reading the manual never killed anyone.
My site

#7 ober

ober
  • Staff Alumni
  • Advanced Member
  • 5,337 posts
  • LocationEast Coast, USA

Posted 23 May 2006 - 03:04 PM

Andy, I agree with you on the stats point from W3, but I've run JS stats engines on sites not too long ago and the stats were pretty comparative. And that was on a site that didn't have anything to do with technology.

Info: PHP Manual


#8 jcombs_31

jcombs_31
  • Staff Alumni
  • Advanced Member
  • 2,066 posts
  • LocationFL

Posted 23 May 2006 - 04:33 PM

If I design fixed width I will do it for 800x600. One site I did bigger by request for my uncles site bcastropics.com.

#9 AndyB

AndyB
  • Staff Alumni
  • Advanced Member
  • 5,465 posts
  • LocationToronto

Posted 23 May 2006 - 11:40 PM

Finally remembered. A wonderful resource for internet statistics with a VERY large base and probably well represents 'average' - [a href=\"http://www.thecounter.com/stats/2006/May/res.php\" target=\"_blank\"]http://www.thecounter.com/stats/2006/May/res.php[/a]

That's the latest browser resolution numbers. You can check other stats or go back in history to see how one particular item has changed with time.
Legend has it that reading the manual never killed anyone.
My site




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users