Re: Why're big corps doing 800px sites nowadays

From: Thomas A. Rowe (tarowe_at_mvps.org)
Date: 02/08/05 

Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 02:05:22 -0500

1. If a site opens to full screen or changes my browser windows size, then I don't return to that
site.

2. I don't know of any clients that would want to pay me to build the same site twice, and the added
cost of maintenance, plus it is a waste of time today since the mainstream browsers basically
display content the same, now I do think a duplicate site should be build to deal with PDA users,
etc. Back in 1996-1998, there were some real differences in the NS and IE, that a developers that
like NS, designed sites that only worked in NS browsers, and as you indicated they created a
separate set of pages for IE. Developers that like the IE browser, generally built sites that worked
in both browsers, at least that is what I did.

3. As I write this I have notepad, FP, Access , OE (and this message open), and just closed IE, all
at about 800 pixels wide overlapping each other, and I do regularly resize two apps so that I can
have them open side by side when I need to cut and paste between them. My goal is to have as much of
my desktop available as possible while working. 

-- 
==============================================
Thomas A. Rowe (Microsoft MVP - FrontPage)
WEBMASTER Resources(tm)
http://www.ycoln-resources.com
FrontPage Resources, WebCircle, MS KB Quick Links, etc.
==============================================
To assist you in getting the best answers for FrontPage support see:
http://www.net-sites.com/sitebuilder/newsgroups.asp
"Richard" <Richard@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message 
news:33707D9E-AD8E-4D91-A339-7747CA8C1AD6@microsoft.com...
> Thanks Jim and Thomas
> Let's further the discussion - and maybe other MVPs as well as you two noted
> experts will weigh-in Tuesday?
>
> I'll agree with you as far as you listed, Jim, knowing that I began
> designing print 30 years ago. A 30 year old relative, head graphic artist for
> a giant household name agrees too. Thomas, we may use multiple windows but my
> own enduser observations from offices to homes to my own kids shows most
> people minimize other windows so they see one at a time - even if the desktop
> shows. The amount of work and difficulty of presentation theory is good for
> average companies - but how about the companies below where the resources
> exist to set up multiple versions - and by my recollection - they used-to do
> it.
>
> Here on my HP 1792x1344 left monitor (1920 max) with 120dip font setting - I
> just fit 3 totally readable index page windows: Dell & HP side by side with
> even Microsoft.com's 1068 completely underneath. All first opened in a full
> size window just incase they use a function with
> "screen.availWidth,screen.availHeight".
>
> Admittedly, Microsoft KB, MSDN, newsgroup and partner pages fit and work
> best with big screens - but not sales pages.
>
> On my right 1068, even all Macromedia's pages are 800's, including DW (for
> Apache) - thus looking small even on my standard res laptop. Apple's pages,
> including those pushing their big screens are 800's. Due to spreadsheets, I
> haven't seen a business client purchase less than 15" since the 90's and
> usually much bigger.
>
> By your proposed theory Jim:
> HP and Dell, plus even Microsoft, elitist DW and Mac are recently populated
> with non-code savvy graphic artists who don't know how to program for good
> presentation on the very products they are pushing.  If I was a
> hardware/software source that wanted to sell up - I'd sure maximize my
> presentation.
>
> You certainly are right - but there's got to be more to it.
>
> **********************************************
>
>
>
> "Thomas A. Rowe" wrote:
>
>> No, just that many users of high resolution monitor view in a browser window that is about 800
>> pixels, so that they can have other windows open and viewable.
>>
>> I run 1280 x 1024 and normally have 3 or 4 windows open at a time. I never have any application 
>> open
>> to full screen.
>>
>> When you design in a fixed width, you ensure that your content is always in same relative 
>> position
>> for each users vs. when designing with a flexible layout, where the content shifts to fit the
>> windows. A fixed width gives you more control over, the limited control that you do have, on how
>> users will see the site.
>>
>> A flexible layout requires a more work to plan and design to ensure that the pages look good for 
>> all
>> browser window sizes, especially when working with tight layout/design. You lose the limited 
>> control
>> you do have over how users will see the site.
>>
>> -- 
>> ==============================================
>> Thomas A. Rowe (Microsoft MVP - FrontPage)
>> WEBMASTER Resources(tm)
>> http://www.ycoln-resources.com
>> FrontPage Resources, WebCircle, MS KB Quick Links, etc.
>> ==============================================
>> To assist you in getting the best answers for FrontPage support see:
>> http://www.net-sites.com/sitebuilder/newsgroups.asp
>>
>> "Richard" <Richard@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:B837B7C4-B202-41BB-BD5D-EDB871D40E04@microsoft.com...
>> > I'm sure its been discussed somewhere - but I can't find anything on why the
>> > majority of hundreds of bigtime sites I see weekly are designed into about
>> > 765px wide - mostly nonframe.
>> >
>> > It seems not many years ago I first learned thru forums to either design for
>> > any size screen resolution or to use a script to redirect to a set of
>> > specific size index pages, mostly filled with the same included material but
>> > maybe different presentation and css. Plus I routinely resize their browser
>> > window to full screen on load so no other windows show.
>> >
>> > Every customer I go to now asks why I am not designing modern "simple sites"
>> > that sit in the middle of the bigger screens prevalent today. My customers
>> > think putting those small web page tables in the middle of a screen is to
>> > make it a focal point. Ugh!!!!! Look at every bank - e.g. Citibank, Usbank;
>> > phone co's e.g Sprint, Verizon; utilities; major vendors, you name it. I just
>> > lost a church to a guy who pitched an entire site that fits 800x600 page
>> > tables.
>> >
>> > Have I missed something? Do studies show that people are selecting 800x600
>> > even if they buy a 15", 17" or 19"?
>> >
>>
>>
>>
Loading