Re: Canvas default

Hi LinKot

that is a good question... things are evolving.  You can check out the 
browser stats at: http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp

Which will show you that approximately 80% of users are at 1024X768 or 
greater resolution.

Of course there could be anomalies in your target market.  Like 
targeting seniors you may get a skewed result, etc.

This chart didn't come over formatted but you can check it out at the 
link above.


Display Resolution

The current trend is that more and more computers are using a screen 
size of 1024x768 pixels or more:
2006 	Higher 	1024x768 	800x600 	640x480 	Unknown
July 	19% 	58% 		17% 		0% 		6%
January 	17% 	57% 	20% 	0% 	6%
   	  	  	  	  	
2005 	  	  	  	  	
July 	14% 	55% 	25% 	0% 	6%
January 	12% 	53% 	30% 	0% 	5%
   	  	  	  	  	
2004 	  	  	  	  	
July 	10% 	50% 	35% 	1% 	4%
January 	10% 	47% 	37% 	1% 	5%
   	  	  	  	  	
2003 	  	  	  	  	
July 	8% 	43% 	44% 	2% 	5%
January 	6% 	40% 	47% 	    2% 	5%
   	   	  	  	  	
2002 	   	   	  	  	
October 	 6% 	38% 	49% 	2% 	5%

lamp Web developers be aware: Many users still have only 800x600 display 
screens.

LinKot wrote:
> To please the masses, I always made sure the width of my sites did not 
> exceed 776 so not to throw the website into horizontal scroll when the 
> resolution is set at 800x600.  In the past, Microsoft, other large 
> corporations and the news media have held the width too.  In recent months

> I've noticed Microsoft is now at 930 pixels wide 
> http://www.microsoft.com/en/us/default.aspx and The New York Times is 970!

> http://www.nytimes.com  I don't think a computer made today has a set 
> resolution of 800x600.
> 
> I know about flex control but I prefer tight control so my design elements

> don't move around ... so I almost always work with a fixed size.  In recent

> months when creating brochure type sites, I have lengthened the height 
> because of client demand but have been able to convince them to keep the 
> width ... so worst scenario a person viewing with 800x600 won't have 
> horizontal scroll but they won't see the site as a brochure type site 
> without a slight vertical scroll.
> 
> My question is ... is it time to widen the canvas?
> 
> Thanks in advance for your thoughts ...
> Linda 
> 

To please the masses, I always made sure the width of my sites did not 
exceed 776 so not to throw the website into horizontal scroll when the 
resolution is set at 800x600.  In the past, Microsoft, other large 
corporations and the news media have held the width too.  In recent months 
I've noticed Microsoft is now at 930 pixels wide 
http://www.microsoft.com/en/us/default.aspx and The New York Times is 970! 
http://www.nytimes.com  I don't think a computer made today has a set 
resolution of 800x600.

I know about flex control but I prefer tight control so my design elements 
don't move around ... so I almost always work with a fixed size.  In recent 
months when creating brochure type sites, I have lengthened the height 
because of client demand but have been able to convince them to keep the 
width ... so worst scenario a person viewing with 800x600 won't have 
horizontal scroll but they won't see the site as a brochure type site 
without a slight vertical scroll.

My question is ... is it time to widen the canvas?

Thanks in advance for your thoughts ...
Linda 

I guess it depends on the site and how much info has to be presented.

Even though my monitors are all greater than 1028, I still like a narrower 
site. And I frequently don't have my browser window maximized, so I don't 
necessary have all those pixels available for display.

...Brenda

"LinKot" <linkot@ameritech.net> wrote in message 
news:inwz9puKHHA.1132@ns1.xroubaix.com...
> To please the masses, I always made sure the width of my sites did not 
> exceed 776 so not to throw the website into horizontal scroll when the 
> resolution is set at 800x600.  In the past, Microsoft, other large 
> corporations and the news media have held the width too.  In recent months

> I've noticed Microsoft is now at 930 pixels wide 
> http://www.microsoft.com/en/us/default.aspx and The New York Times is 970!

> http://www.nytimes.com  I don't think a computer made today has a set 
> resolution of 800x600.
>
> I know about flex control but I prefer tight control so my design elements

> don't move around ... so I almost always work with a fixed size.  In 
> recent months when creating brochure type sites, I have lengthened the 
> height because of client demand but have been able to convince them to 
> keep the width ... so worst scenario a person viewing with 800x600 won't 
> have horizontal scroll but they won't see the site as a brochure type site

> without a slight vertical scroll.
>
> My question is ... is it time to widen the canvas?
>
> Thanks in advance for your thoughts ...
> Linda
> 

There's an interesting article here: http://www.dave-woods.co.uk/?p=58 about 
this.

-- 

Dave Buchholz
I-CRE8
www.i-cre8.co.uk
Skype ID: I-CRE8


"LinKot" <linkot@ameritech.net> wrote in message 
news:inwz9puKHHA.1132@ns1.xroubaix.com...
> To please the masses, I always made sure the width of my sites did not 
> exceed 776 so not to throw the website into horizontal scroll when the 
> resolution is set at 800x600.  In the past, Microsoft, other large 
> corporations and the news media have held the width too.  In recent months

> I've noticed Microsoft is now at 930 pixels wide 
> http://www.microsoft.com/en/us/default.aspx and The New York Times is 970!

> http://www.nytimes.com  I don't think a computer made today has a set 
> resolution of 800x600.
>
> I know about flex control but I prefer tight control so my design elements

> don't move around ... so I almost always work with a fixed size.  In 
> recent months when creating brochure type sites, I have lengthened the 
> height because of client demand but have been able to convince them to 
> keep the width ... so worst scenario a person viewing with 800x600 won't 
> have horizontal scroll but they won't see the site as a brochure type site

> without a slight vertical scroll.
>
> My question is ... is it time to widen the canvas?
>
> Thanks in advance for your thoughts ...
> Linda
> 

Hi Linda - This is a very interesting question, and I'm impressed by your 
point about the Microsoft and NY Times sites. I would say yes, the time when 
that "about 770 pixels" limit can be forgotten is at least
approaching. We 
should always avoid long, long lines of text, but other than that, I'd say 
it's time to start moving on up.  :-)


-- 
Patty Ayers | www.WebDevBiz.com
Free Articles on the Business of Web Development
Web Design Contract, Estimate Request Form, Estimate Worksheet
--





-- I would

"LinKot" <linkot@ameritech.net> wrote in message 
news:inwz9puKHHA.1132@ns1.xroubaix.com...
> To please the masses, I always made sure the width of my sites did not 
> exceed 776 so not to throw the website into horizontal scroll when the 
> resolution is set at 800x600.  In the past, Microsoft, other large 
> corporations and the news media have held the width too.  In recent months

> I've noticed Microsoft is now at 930 pixels wide 
> http://www.microsoft.com/en/us/default.aspx and The New York Times is 970!

> http://www.nytimes.com  I don't think a computer made today has a set 
> resolution of 800x600.
>
> I know about flex control but I prefer tight control so my design elements

> don't move around ... so I almost always work with a fixed size.  In 
> recent months when creating brochure type sites, I have lengthened the 
> height because of client demand but have been able to convince them to 
> keep the width ... so worst scenario a person viewing with 800x600 won't 
> have horizontal scroll but they won't see the site as a brochure type site

> without a slight vertical scroll.
>
> My question is ... is it time to widen the canvas?
>
> Thanks in advance for your thoughts ...
> Linda
>