Yeah, that's my approach, too. I design for 800x600, making sure the 150-170 pixels on the right are non-critical content, usually a column that is not critical to understanding the page as a whole. On most of our pages, we put our "Featured Products" here. That way, 640x480 browsers see everything except the non-critical column on the right, 800x600 browsers see everything, and 1024x768 browsers see everything plus a little bit of extra white space.
Anyone who browses the web at higher than 1024x768 is surely used to seeing a lot of extra white space, and I think it's futile to try to accommodate these people at the expense of all the less-than-1024x768 browsers. I think it's funny whenever I read an article that scolds anyone who designs their web pages using fixed-width layouts. Supposedly we're supposed to have a dynamic column so that our pages will stretch all the way across a 1600x1200 display. Hmm... What's the point? I find a fixed-width layout with a little extra white space on large displays to be a lot less annoying than a dynamic layout in which what was supposed to be a square-ish block of text is stretched out to a single line of text that's 800-pixels wide or so. I realize that sometimes these dynamic layouts can be done tastefully, but I also think it's silly to force oneself to use a dynamic layout, even when it doesn't work well, as if there's some golden rule of dynamic layouts that cannot be broken. - Vieth > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Manzotti [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 2:35 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [ASP] Scalability > > > The Professional Network wrote: > > >Manzo, > > > >I fully agree. > > > >However, I have discovered that a large part of my audience is at > >800x600, and another large part is at 1024x768, so I need to make my > >site usable for both. > > > > > Fair enough, though I still design all my sites for use at > 800x600. I then either centre the whole page, or align it > left, depending on client preference. > > I'm curious as to why making a site usable at the lower > resolution precludes it being usable at higher resolutions? > > Cheers, > > manzo > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > --------------------~--> > $9.95 domain names from Yahoo!. Register anything. > http://us.click.yahoo.com/J8kdrA/y20IAA/yQLSAA/17folB/TM > -------------------------------------------------------------- > ------~-> > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > ------- > Home : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/active-server-pages > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > Post : [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subscribe : [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> $9.95 domain names from Yahoo!. Register anything. http://us.click.yahoo.com/J8kdrA/y20IAA/yQLSAA/17folB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> --------------------------------------------------------------------- Home : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/active-server-pages --------------------------------------------------------------------- Post : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/active-server-pages/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
