Most popular monitor resoultions
Moderator: General Moderators
Most popular monitor resoultions
I have just looked at the global stats on thecounter.com which takes into account 38113581 visitors (for May 2003), these are the stats for monitor resolution.
800x600 14702904 (44%)
1024x768 13992243 (42%)
1280x1024 1636875 (4%)
1152x864 1027458 (3%)
640x480 764664 (2%)
Unknown 463074 (1%)
1600x1200 228132 (0%)
Is this accurate? i thought 800x600 would be in the minority by now.
Can i get more accurate results from somewhere?
Mark
800x600 14702904 (44%)
1024x768 13992243 (42%)
1280x1024 1636875 (4%)
1152x864 1027458 (3%)
640x480 764664 (2%)
Unknown 463074 (1%)
1600x1200 228132 (0%)
Is this accurate? i thought 800x600 would be in the minority by now.
Can i get more accurate results from somewhere?
Mark
- twigletmac
- Her Royal Site Adminness
- Posts: 5371
- Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 2:21 am
- Location: Essex, UK
I think that there's a fairly even split between 800x600 and 1024x768 - I know a number of people who run their monitors at 800x600 because they prefer it to higher resolutions (this includes some techies). The stats from thecounter.com reflects anything I've seen elsewhere (including stats from my own sites).
Mac
Mac
"I personally prefer 1024 x 768 and configure most of my site layouts to work with 1024 x 768."
Then it sounds like you're forsaking 50% of users for the sake of your own personal preference. Of course that depends on who your audience is, but you should never discount the hard facts on the basis of "I don't understand why these people are so stuppiiiiid." Those stupid people are probably paying your bills.
I run at 1280x and find that 800x600 is generally plenty of space to work with for a web site.
Then it sounds like you're forsaking 50% of users for the sake of your own personal preference. Of course that depends on who your audience is, but you should never discount the hard facts on the basis of "I don't understand why these people are so stuppiiiiid." Those stupid people are probably paying your bills.
I run at 1280x and find that 800x600 is generally plenty of space to work with for a web site.
Definitely need to support 800x600 - but I'd abandon 640x480 to scroll bars in an instant if a good design didn't shrink well. It's just not worth spending time on IMHO.
Funny though: there's all these laws about accessibility but nothing to stop us discriminating against small-screeners, netscape 4...
Funny though: there's all these laws about accessibility but nothing to stop us discriminating against small-screeners, netscape 4...
-
Cruzado_Mainfrm
- Forum Contributor
- Posts: 346
- Joined: Sun Jun 15, 2003 11:22 pm
- Location: Miami, FL
i have built all my sites in 800 while working in no less than 1024, i prefer to work on 1280x, which gives me plenty of space for any other tasks.
I even program at high resolutions even though it's more difficult to read when the font-size is small.
And yes, 800x600 is the leading layout size, no doubts about it
1024x sites would make me(if i had a 800x res.) mad
EDIT: aren't we getting off subject?
EDIT: if you can't surf, then don't, sorry 640x users
I even program at high resolutions even though it's more difficult to read when the font-size is small.
And yes, 800x600 is the leading layout size, no doubts about it
1024x sites would make me(if i had a 800x res.) mad
EDIT: aren't we getting off subject?
EDIT: if you can't surf, then don't, sorry 640x users
I was using 1024x768 since start.. and now I use 1280x1024... but while desiging site I design them for 800x600 and/or 1024x768, again ti also depend on target audience. but lot of people still use 800x600 (as I've seen so far).. and due to prices slashing down of graphic accelerators.. 1024x768 is also neck to neck with 800x600 res.
Like I said... it depends on target audience also... 
eg. I'm currently working on my personal website, which is made for min. 1024x768 res. becoz I am a graphic designer and I wouldn't like my site to be regular.. (you know what all things you have to give up to make it all compatible site).
also.. all my oversease clients (uk, us) are on 1024x768 res. but here in india 60-65% clients are on 800x600... and all though 1024x768 is almost 40%... former is still at large.
eg. I'm currently working on my personal website, which is made for min. 1024x768 res. becoz I am a graphic designer and I wouldn't like my site to be regular.. (you know what all things you have to give up to make it all compatible site).
also.. all my oversease clients (uk, us) are on 1024x768 res. but here in india 60-65% clients are on 800x600... and all though 1024x768 is almost 40%... former is still at large.
- twigletmac
- Her Royal Site Adminness
- Posts: 5371
- Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 2:21 am
- Location: Essex, UK
Generally, a more technically minded group of users are likely to be slanted towards higher resolutions but that doesn't mean those using lower resolutions aren't techies, nor does it mean that they are too stupid to change their resolution. Consider the following:
- Design your sites using percentage, not pixel widths so that it can stretch and compact depending on the user's resolution.
- Smaller monitors (e.g. 15 inch ones) are still in widespread use and 1024x768 on a small monitor can be painful on the eyes.
- Partially sited people may have a large monitor set at a low resolution so that they can see the site better.
- Mozilla has the web developer extension add-on which means you can quickly resize your browser to different resolutions - test your sites.
- The web is not print media - it won't, and can't look the same on all user's screens, make your designs able to fit gracefully into as much as possible and you're likely to have more content users.
- Check your stats before alienating any users but as above, try and design so that you don't have a fixed width site.
-
Cruzado_Mainfrm
- Forum Contributor
- Posts: 346
- Joined: Sun Jun 15, 2003 11:22 pm
- Location: Miami, FL