the free sites width
 

is it me or are lately alot of webmasters make free sites bigger then 800x600, the last days i notice alot of free sites where i have to scroll to see the rest of the site while i review?

That's why I added the 800 wide rule as well as wrote this Tip & Trick :)

Best I can tell designers have 80" monitors set with everything so small that your need coke bottle glasses to be able to read the screen.

It is sponsors too. I can't even get SunnyDollar's new admin to fit on my screen unless I change resolutions.

One of the Mac news sites that I visit each day just redesigned their site. I guess Apple must be coming out with a 25" laptop seeing as that is what I would need to view their new and fucked up design.

I've also added the no wider then 800 rule to my lists.

i have my screen on 800x600 thats the way i build myself, but this eve realy from every 10 sites i review i have to scroll at least 6 sites to see all, btw cleo, i have that problem with sexmoney, if i go in admin there i cant see all even not with the f11 button.
Great tip GG!|violin|

I think it should be a no brianer.I rarely go wider then 600 maybe 650.
How hard is it to make a table thats 650 pixels wide and anything thats not a table if it goes past it its too big.
GG people don't read they assume they know what they are doing haha

Yeah another one. The list seems to be growing each day.

yeah
 

yeah its getting pretty bad, alot of webmasters are getting larger monitors with better resolutions and after a few weeks forget that some people have 14 and 15 inch monitors, or even smaller laptop screens.

i never go over 750 in a table, and usually not over 650, 750 is only for the recips :P

i totally agree it should be a no brainer.

Why dont you guys up your resolution? I really dont understand the purpose of still having it on 800? I just redesigned my entire site practically to fit the 800 screen and the whole damn time I was cussing under my breath at you people. |jester|

Sean416 - the problem is that "you people" covers about 70-80% of our surfers.

If you were going to sell loafs of bread, would you cut the slices so that they only fit into toasters that can handle bagles?

750 is about it... the magic number. It sucks, but it works.

I am actually thinking I am going to shrink back down and work that way for a while to see the world that way.

Alex

GG - I completely agree, I didnt mean "you people" in a condescending manner, I just meant the people who posted before me, why they havent chose to up their resolution.

I do agree with you, that all resolutions should be 800 because as you stated, the majority of people do have their monitors set to that resolution. That's why I took the time to resdesign my site to fit those people. My only question was to those who can answer for themselves, why not up the resolution?

I didn't think you were being condescending :)

My point is that reviewers have to think & act like surfers.

My screen res is 1280 - LOL - but I have marked off on my monitor where 640, 800 & 1024 are :)

I don't get people who set their displays to these really tiny resolutions.

I can set my 21" display to 1856 but I would be blind by the end of the day.

On topic but sortof not - two other tips

Check your work in other browsers to see how they render - I check every page I build in IE, NN7x, NN4.7, Mozilla and Opera. That extra

I build my sites with Homesite. I can check if my site is good for 800x600 while I build (well, I know it is because I use 750 pix tables). I can choose IE or Netscape for it. I use IE and check my sites in Netscape 4.7 separately. I don't have Operas or so as IMHO there is not many users for those, and if site looks OK in NS 4.7 it looks OK in every browser.

here too, i have just a 17"monitor and i have it on 800x600, i have tried the 1024......i cant see shit, i have already glasses when i work on the puter, so i dont need double glasses to see anything what i make , thats why i stay at the 800x600 better for me too when i am building a site.

Here are some stats about res (you can change month in url)...

http://www.thecounter.com/stats/2004/September/res.php

compare to last year... http://www.thecounter.com/stats/2003/September/res.php

33% is still enough to justify building for 800x imo

It's only 33%? That seems low.

I got my sister a computer for her birthday a few months ago & it was default set to 800x600 :)

Keeping everything fitting within 800 pixels makes your pages about the same width as a sheet of writing paper. After thousands of years writing paper has stayed about the same width for a reason.

I think that is pretty close to accurate.

It's not so much the screen resolution as we know anyways...it's the browser view port.

I have no idea why, but most people I know with higher resolutions run the browser full screen. Even if it's 1280.

I run in 1152x864

...but always run FF or IE in 800 width.

I recall reading that laptops have started to outsell desktops...and all laptops run over 800.

Also, like Cleo mentions- we're all use to digesting information at a certain size.

It's not such a big deal to stay <800 width while making things a "bit bigger" for the higher resolution audience. :)

I see from that screen shot that you are like me and don't run your browser at full screen.

I run everything at full screen - after all, that's why |buddy| created Alt-Tab :D

Yep. There's no reason to unless the site needs the space like anandtech or something.

Since so many sites use white as a bg color, all that extra white on screen would just bother my eyes.

PS- GG- I got the |buddy| Saturday.

I kept looking at the package and address and wondered WHAT in the hell it could be. It was almost like I couldn't open it until I could resolve in my head what was in it.

I relented and out pops |buddy|

Thx. :)

I certainly believe the 800 pixel rule should be on it's way out (soon), like 468 pixel banners (which were for old Apples with 470 pixel screen width) - way over 50% of all visitors are now on 1024x768, whereas just ~20% still on 800x600...

I usualy push the limit with 770 pixels, sometimes with 772 (which is a full screen), but what I'd really try to do once again is a site which needs only sideways scrolling, and no down-scrolling. I did that a few years back, and it was like walking through a real gallery = I liked it a lot! Just no reviewer will accept this (open up your horizon!)