[ndroo]

Hi all,

I'm coding my first site for a photographer friend of mine, and I told him about the 800x600, etc etc res and that about 15% of internet users will be using 800x600. He still decided to optimise it for 1024x768 users, for reasons of his own. Now I'm just doing this to learn myself in the process, so I went along with his decision. I then designed the page in photoshop with 1024x768 in mind - i later discovered (beginners stupidity) that the width was all ok however the 768pixels i had coded for, would obviously not fit in the browser window height on a 1024x768 desktop. Now I really like the site in this fixed layout as it uses some fixed images, but it loses its effect if you have to scroll down.

My questions are -

a) Is it ok to code fixed layouts for graphic intensive sites?
b) If I'm optimising for 1024x768, do I design the site in such a way that it would fit in a the browser window exactly, or just go with the scrolling?
c) If I design it to fit exactly, is there a known pixel size that is used for it to fit in a full screen browser window operating on a 1024x768 desktop? Or does it not make sense since most browsers will have differing heights etc?

Thanks!

[dtrenz]

Originally Posted by ndroo

a) Is it ok to code fixed layouts for graphic intensive sites?
b) If I'm optimising for 1024x768, do I design the site in such a way that it would fit in a the browser window exactly, or just go with the scrolling?
c) If I design it to fit exactly, is there a known pixel size that is used for it to fit in a full screen browser window operating on a 1024x768 desktop? Or does it not make sense since most browsers will have differing heights etc?

a) sure, why not. liquid is usually better, but also usually more time consuming, and requires a few aesthetic compromises from time to time.

b) shoot for safe dimensions, below the res. like maybe width = 980px, and allow for variable margin, since if each browser viewport has different dimensions. or if you have large or small browser toolbars, or extra toolbars (i.e. web developer toolbar for FF)

c) N/A (see above)

[ndroo]

hey thanks for the help

didnt exactly understand what you mean by "allow for variable margins".. do you mean that I should try and design in such a way that it wont be compromised if the user has to scroll vertically?

[pgo]

I would go lower than 980. Probably more like 950 at the absolute most. Probably I'd go 900.

[ndroo]

yes width's ok i think i'm managing.. i'm more confused regarding what height - whether to try make it look good on one page with fixed heights, or give up and try and design it keeping in my mind that the user will be scrolling vertically probably

[lucidcreations]

The exact recommend size for 1024 x 768 is 955 x 600.

Nothing wring with working with a fixed layout as long as you visitors don't have to start scrolling vertically.

[dtrenz]

vertical scrolling should be expected. if someone has poor eyesight and has set the font larger, etc...

[wavereel]

if you use a stats tracker you'll know what's used most for your site. I've found 85% use 1024x768.

[raygirl]

Hi,

Google 'webmonkey browser size' (sorry, DT forum wasn't letting me post URLs to other sites for some wierd reason )

Click on the link that says Sizing Up the Browsers at the webmonkey website. It's basically an intro to how you could treat a web page in various resolutions, browsers and platforms. An old site site as 640x480 is no longer used anymore!

I hope it helps.

[pgo]

Originally Posted by raygirl

'webmonkey browser size'

You do realize that article is five years out of date...

[raygirl]

Hello,

Yeah I know it's five or more years out of date but the first part explains briefly about web browser sizes etc. for beginners so I thought I might be a useful starter...