I would really like to expand my website’s resolution in the near future, but after checking my Google Analytics stats, I discovered that 25% of my visitors still view my site with a 1024 x 768 resolution.
So if I expand my design to 1200 pixels, that means over 4,000 people per day would have to scroll left and right to see the entire site.
Now, of course I could remedy this by using percentages instead of fixed widths, but I actually like my columns to look the same in every resolution.
I’ve noticed a lot of you are moving to a wider resolution. Just wondering if you took your visitor stats into account before deciding?
Maybe your numbers look better than mine, but 25% is still too large a number for me to leave the 1,000 pixel width design.
I must admit, I thought that percentage would be a bit lower by now, but I’m sure the niche plays a role too. For example, a site targeted toward computer gurus, may have fewer people using a 1024 resolution.
What do your resolution stats say? Do you use percentages instead of fixed widths on your site?
Did you take your visitor stats into consideration before designing your site? Or did you say, To heck with it, people just need to get larger monitors! 😉
Let’s discuss!
hi lisa i am editing my site and i have encountered a problem that i was craeting my site using adboe dreamweaver today i tried to view it with a big monitor the problem is i have to scroll from left to right like u said so and the screen resolution i used 1280 800 whats the problem dont please help
thanks a lot for the info ….this is one thing every web designer should keep in mind while developing a site
Excelent recomendation. Thanks a los for this thread
Yeah! i think cheap people should wake up and change their computer screen! All my websites support 1024×768.I definitely understand people who want fixed resolutions,having it look the same to everyone is a definite goal. Well How can we make everyone happy ? hahahaha
I’m in the camp that believes in fluid content.
My nav and sidebar are fixed in width, but content will flow to fill the space between.
Maybe if I set my style before learning the code (Ok, I’m still learning…) I might feel different, but I tend to hang on to things that work, no matter what the age. I have both an 800 px monitor and a wide screen one!
I’m targeting the old car hobby, and many in this group just don’t upgrade unless the computer dies on them. Maybe the stats will prove me wrong, but even so, if my CSS already supports that last 2%, why not keep it?
Look, I’m not saying that everyone should copy everything about every major web site, BUT the major sites tend to go with fixed width screens, and as the saying goes “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it!”
For those of you who would like to know more i find this link.
http://css-tricks.com/resolution-specific-stylesheets/
If you have any major concerns over any or all dives you can set up different .ccs style sheets and code the page to use one depending on the screen resolution or mobile devices etc.
This is extremely useful to have much greater control but it can be time consuming although it will give you much greater control over the appearance and will also get indexed nicely by google if you have a .css for people with disabilities!
Here in the philippines people still use 1024X768 resolution so I always base my site on that resolution. . . 56% of my visitors use it so why fix whats not broken? I guess its kind of like internet explorer 6 , since people still use windows xp then some are bound to use ie 6. . . specially in 3rd world countries. . . and offices for that matter. . . so a good practice for web designers would be 1024×768 and fixing ie6 bugs if you do have a number of people viewing your site on that browser ofcourse
Hello Michael,
I would certainly suggest you design your website to be as compatible with as many browsers as possible.
Take Amazon.com, for example. I have purchased products from their website with just about every type of device out there – something you can’t do on other websites, ebay.com for example.
At the end of the day, if somebody can’t access your content, they will usually leave straight away, resulting in a lost visitor (potential customer).
The minimum, is to make sure your site loads properly for Chrome, Firefox, IE, Safari and Opera. But the more, the better. Best of success!
I’m in the process of designing a blog about games on the Nintendo Wii. I want the blog to be readable in the Opera browser on the Wii. The browser does a good job of zooming in and out to get content to fit the screen, so it’s working better than I expected.
I use the Wii browser to surf from the comfort of my armchair. In fact, I’m reading this site on the Wii right now, and have typed this post (rather laboriously) using the on-screen point-and- click keyboard. I could have got up to get my wireless USB keyboard but, as I said, I am in my armchair and I’m just too lazy to get out of it.
Anyway, does anyone else consider console browsers (and their limitations) when designing a website or blog?
This is indeed a dilemma. I still design with the 1024×768 in mind, but am mindful of those with larger screen resolutions. What I find that works for me is to have a few sources to view a finished site. I have an old dell laptop that I use to view newly designed sites in 1024, then I always check the site with my friends new laptop as well as another friend’s Mac, plus my own 1680 desktop resolution. When I feel that everything checks out on different monitors and screen resolutions I am then comfortable uploading the site. Thanks for an interesting post Lisa…:)
.-= Lyle Robinson´s last blog … Friday Fun – May 7, 2010 =-.
Hi All,
I agonized over this very subject when I started creating my website and finally decided that I would make a fluid website. My minimum resolution supports a width down to 980 so that anyone could view it with 1024 or higher accounting for the different browsers and add-ons that they may have. Since I’ve started it, I’ve only had 5 people look at it with less than that. The majority is 1024 and higher.
The one thing that I do have to look out for however when I create a new page is that it looks good both at 1024 and at the wide screen resolutions such as 1680 since it is a fluid page. If there is not enough content on the page, it tends to make it look really bad around the footer. Sometimes, If there is just nothing more that needs to be said on the topic of the page, I will use graphics to make the adjustment so that the page looks good.
It’s become hard to customize websites for so many different users and interfaces including browsers and screen resolutions, but most people do use default settings.
Really good website.
Because of the wide diversity of screen resolutions, as you mention, I just use percentages. That way, everyone who views will get to see my entire site; not some people won’t and for some it will be too small.
I definitely understand people who want fixed resolutions; having it look the same to everyone is a definite goal. For me, though, at this point, I think percentages are the best option.
I do most of my browsing on my blackberry or iPod touch and I’ve never run into a blog that didn’t have some sort of mobile version.
On the iPod it usually will show me the full site and I just have to zoom in to read it. WordPress.com blogs seem to always have a iPhone theme enabled though.
On the blackberry blogs are usually plain text and images with most (if not all) CSS stripped out.
On static websites I often run in to troubles with text and images being in the wrong place so if you can try to code a mobile site and redirect me there 😀
39.38% with the resolution of 1024 x 768 and below, so the remaining 60.62% are above the 1024 x 768.
All of my websites are designed for the 1024 pixel width, guess I will be staying with that for some time.
One point to consider, is that on my dual 20″ monitors I hardly ever have the windows maximised to the full screen, even though I have 1680 pixels I may only use 1100 for my web browsing.
I guess another discussion is, do you test your page on all the browsers, IE8, Firefox, Chrome…..and what ones do you just forget.
My figures are very similar, around 15% for 1024X768 and another 10% for smaller resolutions. When I’m designing I prefer to work with fixed pixel widths as well (although the new WP theme I’m using has a part fluid layout). Personally, I prefer simple layouts. Designing for larger resolutions can tempt some to cram more on the page, I’m not sure that’s a good thing from a user point of view.
Sorry for sending the above post too soon!
1024X768: 16%
1280X1024: 14.2%
1680X1050: 14.1% (This is my laptop screen rez)
1280X800: 13.39%
The next resolution is 1366X768 at 7.49%. Interesting that the top four are pretty close in range. So about 60% of my visitors are veiwing my site in the same or lower resolution than I do…hmmmm.
.-= James Fisher´s last blog … Will Print Books Be Considered Antiques in the Future? =-.
My screen resolution stats break down like this (for March 2010):
1024X768:
.-= James Fisher´s last blog … Will Print Books Be Considered Antiques in the Future? =-.
This was fun to check. Glad to see I have no 800 x 600 folks 🙂
1. 1440×900 24.57%
2. 1280×800 18.01%
3. 1280×1024 14.75%
4. 1024×768 10.99%
5. 1920×1200 6.31%
6. 1600×1200 5.49%
7. 1680×1050 4.78%
8. 1366×768 3.76%
9. 1843×1152 1.02%
10. 1280×960 0.92%
.-= Jeremy Johnson´s last blog … The Ant Philosophy =-.
For me it’s not that big of a problem as only 12% are using the 1000 px resolution, but I really am wondering how long will it take for everybody to go to a higher res.
I think there is, and probably always will be, people who don’t want massive computer screens. Sometimes this is because of a lack of space, other times it’s due to portability, and some people just like their current size. I agree with you Lisa about coding for percentages rather than fixed widths, but at the same time you’re also correct to strive for consistency. At the end of the day NOBODY should have to scroll sideways, it’s unprofessional and irritating. Period. (or “full stop” as we Brits say)
Until less than 5% of my visitors are using 1024×768, I’ll continue to design for it. But it’s nice so many people have at least 1024… I remember designing for 640 minimum!
.-= Jonathan Bennett´s last blog … Castle Crashers (Xbox Live) Desktop Background Wallpaper =-.
Good topic. I prefer for users to have a big screen and a narrow-in-width website with empty background space, as opposed to having to scroll sideways. The necessary evil of scrolling UP and DOWN is bad enough, but having to scroll LEFT and RIGHT really takes the cake…there’s just no excuse for it! In the future world of the web hopefully there will be no protocol for page scrolling, as EVERYTHING will be accessible from the screen view. This leads me very nicely into a related topic…web design for mobile phones, which is FINALLY taking off, though it’s an area that, for many (myself included), remains shrouded in a swirling cloud of mystery…
I always check what the trends are for resolution before either working on a new site or overhauling one. Currently over 48% of my visitors are on 1024×768 resolution, which is both surprising considering the number of larger monitors becoming available but also annoying as I would love to expand the site width wise without worrying about alienating so many visitors.
To some extent I think that resolution matters, and a less tech savvy audience will generally have older equipment so I think that stats on visitors should play a role in design changes.
.-= Business Logos´s last blog … Scorpio =-.
I’ll have to check my analytics and get back to ya on that. Like Kharim, I never took this into consideration. It’s a good question…
.-= Jarrod@ Optimistic Journey´s last blog … You Know You’re Favored by God When… =-.
I’m checking my stats now and finding that less that 20% are viewing on smaller monitors. But I wouldn’t make any changes because I myself view on a small monitor when I’m at my day job (during lunch hours of course, hehe) and when I’m traveling.
.-= Ileane @Blogging´s last blog … HootSuite Tutorial Video =-.
I created my first website few months ago. I used the exact same page width as 2createawebsite.com. Mainly because I had no clue how to decide on anything different coupled with the success of your site. Had about 3k unique visitors last month. 34% of my visitors use 1024×768.
I have a different concern for the future I think. It is how much mobile web usage will increase via total web usage and what kind of screen limits come into play for mobile optimized websites. I haven’t gotten educated on this yet, but its for sure that more and more web browsing or ‘surfing’ (if they still use that word) is going to be coming from mobile platforms. I don’t even know if the fixed width my site has now can be seen without scrolling left and right on, for example, an iphone. So I actually was not thinking of expanding. I was thinking someday I might be tempted to somehow squeeze into something even less wide than I am already.
This is an excellent point. Some people create mobile versions of their site to make viewing easier with smartphones. I haven’t looked into this yet but this is on my to-do list. My sites look decent with the iPhone. You can click to zoom in so that makes reading even easier. But I can’t speak for all phones since they are all different sizes.
Our website was designed with the user in mind from the get go. That said, because the website focuses on a travel destination outside the USA, our visitor base is quite diverse. Not surprisingly, a large number (38%) are still using the old resolution.
The solution? A relative width design using CSS. The width/spacing is done using percentages, not absolute numbers. I have tested the website on several monitors, browsers and using different resolution within each. The resolution/appearance adjusts to the user’s screen settings. It has worked like a charm and I use this technology for all of the websites in our portfolio.
The only side effect? Some browsers tend to distort some of the text within the left and right panels, however the main content in the center column remains perfect.
.-= Dubai City Information´s last blog … Calling Card to Abu Dhabi =-.
I didn’t really put this into consideration. But i think my blog shows on all sizes of monitors. Cause i view it on a laptop, a wide screen desktop and also a small screen and they both work
.-= Kharim´s last blog … Which Niche Should You Choose? =-.
1. 1024×768 85.71%
2. 1280×1024 3.57%
3. 1440×900 3.57%
4. 1280×800 1.79%
5. 1366×768 1.79%
6. 1680×1050 1.79%
7. 1920×1200 1.79%
New site…but I know I”m not changing the size of anything just yet. (but a little scrolling never hurt anybody, I say test it out…they can ctrl – until it fits to their screen)
.-= Jason Wallace´s last blog … Thrifty Living Tips – 6 Ways to Eliminate Overspending on Food =-.
I hadn’t thought about it as it pertains to my blog – but I’ll definitely take a look into my stats before I make any changes. My issue comes when designing my Twitter Background. I get so frustrated because on my wide screen at home it looks great, but when I take a look at it from other computers things are cut-off where they shouldn’t be. I want a professional-looking Twitter background, but I’m at my wits end with it. At this point, I’m selfishly voting for wider screens! 🙂
.-= Kiesha @ We Blog Better´s last blog … Games are for kids, not marriage =-.
I just checked my stats. 25% of my readers are still on 1024×1280, but the crazy thing was that 5.5% of them are still on 600×800, so there’s no way I can shift away from 1000px wide screen. Of course, I JUST widened my site to 1000px, and I’m all excited about how much room I have! 🙂
.-= Grady´s last blog … Something Cool Is Brewing… =-.
Unfortunately 32% on my site are still at 1024×768 so sticking with the fixed width for now.
I do consider the users of my site when setting the width, although the to heck with it option is tempting sometimes when looking for room to fit something in.
.-= Kellie´s last blog … Healthy young people die from sudden death syndrome =-.
Hey Lisa,
This is a problem I see a lot in web design. User experience should never be sacrificed. 40% of my visitors have a screen resolution of 1024×768, so I will definitely be sticking to a design that works well with that for now.
For me, using percentages tend to distort how my site design looks on different resolutions. Oftentimes it does not look how I want it to and that’s not acceptable for me. So I prefer using fixed width.
Honestly, I still use a 1024×768 resolution for my own monitor. My eyes adjust better to it 🙂
Have a great day Lisa.
.-= Robyn from Sam’s Web Guide´s last blog … My Blogging Journey So Far – March Blog Statistics =-.
When designing website layouts I try to make sure it fits within 1024 x 768. My current screen res is 1280x 800.
If I want my site to be liquid, I like to keep things like the nav bars to stay the same size, and the main content section resize.
If people are just too lazy or cheap to get a bigger screen (Like those people still using 800×600) I’ll usually just stop supporting them.
Great post by the way Lisa 🙂
.-= MattBrox´s last blog … mattbrox: @iLEGITlovebiebs Oh I’m sorry. I meant douchebags with usernames like @iLEGITlovebiebs and also can’t spell. 🙂 =-.
Yeah, fortunately the 800×600 folks were only 2% of my visits so I’m certainly not going to worry about them anymore. I have actually thought about using fluid for my content and fixed for my nav. It’s so hard for me to get away from 100% fixed for whatever reason.