Support for 800X600...

It doesn't matter if you do all the error checking in the world, or if you have the most beautiful graphics, if your site or application design isn't usable, it's not going to do well. Get input and advice on usability and user interface issues here.

Moderator: General Moderators

User avatar
pickle
Briney Mod
Posts: 6445
Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2004 6:11 pm
Location: 53.01N x 112.48W
Contact:

Post by pickle »

I agree. Perhaps I didn't communicate my feelings accurately ;) What I meant was that when I see a static width site, my initial snap reaction is that it's a cop out. Then conscious thought kicks in and I re-evaluate. It's totally the the client's decision.
Real programmers don't comment their code. If it was hard to write, it should be hard to understand.
User avatar
JellyFish
DevNet Resident
Posts: 1361
Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2006 7:18 pm
Location: San Diego, CA

Post by JellyFish »

Wow popular post. I've decided to appreciate the 1024x768 crowds and give the bones to the 800x600 users. In other words, I support the 800x600 clients so that they could veiw the site but is best presented in a 1024x768 resolution. Smaller resolutions are not supported what-so-ever, my site is not designed for the mobile webers.

Is there ways of checking ones resolution with javascript?
User avatar
RobertGonzalez
Site Administrator
Posts: 14293
Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2003 6:04 pm
Location: Fremont, CA, USA

Post by RobertGonzalez »

Yes, there is. I forget how at the moment, but it is very possible.

I think alienating your users because they are not doing what you want is, well, Microsoftish.
User avatar
AKA Panama Jack
Forum Regular
Posts: 878
Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2005 4:21 pm

Post by AKA Panama Jack »

Well, after saying I didn't have time to change my sites from the fixed with of 800, even though I really hate fixed width sites, I took a few minutes to actually fix them.

Both the ADOdb Lite and Template Lite sites are now using the same templates but they are dynamic width. What ever size window you use they format for that window size. Quite frankly they look many times better now. When viewing them with my browser at 1280x1024 the pages look far, far better than before. Those huge bands of empty space on the sides are gone. :D

The layouts are simple but look so much better as dynamic width.

BTW, I looked at the http://www.clanci.net/ site that was given as an example of why you can't have a dynamic layout without massive alterations. It wouldn't be that hard to change it to a dynamic width site. :)
matthijs
DevNet Master
Posts: 3360
Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2005 3:57 pm

Post by matthijs »

Panama jack, indeed that looks fine. One thing you could do with the header graphic (on template lite site) is use a very big image and let one side flow out of sight when you decrease the window size.
(also, please increase the text size a bit!)

On sites were graphics are only supportive it's very easy to make the site layout fluid. However, I can imagine that that choice is a bit more difficult when you're talking about for example a graphic artists' site or a glossy visual site with lots of high quality images as content.
User avatar
The Phoenix
Forum Contributor
Posts: 294
Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 8:12 pm

Post by The Phoenix »

matthijs wrote:On sites were graphics are only supportive it's very easy to make the site layout fluid. However, I can imagine that that choice is a bit more difficult when you're talking about for example a graphic artists' site or a glossy visual site with lots of high quality images as content.
Many manage the balance between them:

http://csszengarden.com/?cssfile=/171/171.css&page=3
http://csszengarden.com/?cssfile=/181/181.css&page=2
http://csszengarden.com/?cssfile=/202/202.css&page=0

Granted, its not a collection of high quality images as content, but they are definitely glossy visual sites by graphic artists. They seem to be fairly fluid.
matthijs
DevNet Master
Posts: 3360
Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2005 3:57 pm

Post by matthijs »

The Phoenix wrote: Many manage the balance between them:

http://csszengarden.com/?cssfile=/171/171.css&page=3
http://csszengarden.com/?cssfile=/181/181.css&page=2
http://csszengarden.com/?cssfile=/202/202.css&page=0

Granted, its not a collection of high quality images as content, but they are definitely glossy visual sites by graphic artists. They seem to be fairly fluid.
Uuh Phoenix: if you wanted to show examples of great fluid design why did you pick 3 fixed-width designs??? Ok, the second example has one fluid column, but the columns with imagery are still static... :wink:
Post Reply