800x600 fade away
- Started
- Last post
- 21 Responses
- Mick
How long do you think until 800x600 resolution is a small enough percent that we don't have to design for it in the corporate world (like 640x480 is now). Or will 800x600 never reach less than 5%?
Just curious if anyone has a crystal ball ;)
- IloveQBN0
not soon enough!
- neeko0
Twenty-eight days, six hours, forty-two minutes, twelve seconds.
- monokrom0
I was talking to God on the phone just the other day and he happened to mention that he'd decreed that the 800x600 px res stats would stay where they are until, and I quote, "all the gimpy so-called web designers have learned how to utilize the space that they have". make of that what you will.
I could hear Jesus in the background cursing up a storm - something about a "another piece of sh!t full-screen flash site". Jesus browses the web on a PII 450MHz running Win98 (over a dialup connection).
- gcabral0
i actually spoke to god the other day too...
SHE said that she doesn't even surf the web.. she prefers to speak to people by channeling her thoughts through space and into the minds of those in need.
- unknown0
I spoke to God the other day and it said that "come the satellite destroying meteor shower that I'm gonna send your pathetic, polluted planet your silly little interweb aint gonna mean shit"
thats what it said
- monokrom0
gcabral : Alanis Morrisette likes to kid people like that. Don't be fooled.
- gcabral0
She told me that the planet will be destroyed by those who inhabit it, and that the web means JACK SQUAT..!!!
but she does like google
- Mick0
God doesn't control computer resolutions - you think God would have come up with 640x480? mwaahahaa
- CyBrainX0
800x600 will go away in about a year and a half. That's my guess. You can't buy a computer that has a resolution that small. It's all 1024, at least.
There is no way that God has genital. Male or female. The concept is so absurd and it leads to superstitious and fundamentalist belief systems.
If God is a biological unit, where does he/she shit, piss, fuck, sneeze and cut his/her finger nails?
- unfittoprint0
Designing for 800x600 resolution actually gives you a lot of experience regarding usability and layout "tightness". People, in a year form now we may be designing sites or PDA's resolution (320x240). God help us all.
- SL34ZY0
Even if every computer on the Web had 1024x768 I wouldn't want designers to start making pages that were 1000 pixels wide. Aside from k10k there aren't many sites that make use of the space well. I like surfing in a window about as wide as Newstoday. Surfing full screen on anything above 800x600 is yucky.
- unknown0
personnaly I surf in 1600X1200 and I personnaly think it's the only way to surf ... but then again ... who gives a rats ass what I like and don't. I try and keep my sites 640X480 but I am eager to have more space... not really for page layout and stuff lke that. but really for designing opportunities... I hate the idea that some one designs something (not a web site) and it's 800X600 or what ever and some one esle has to view it with scroolbars .... Like looking at the mona lisa using scrool bars ... kinda sucky ... anyways those agressive I hate those who love big resolutions ... calm down and think of what bigger res can bring us ... It cant take anything away ... so we can only have more possibilites ... so the idea of not wanting 800X600 res as a standard is pretty much unfounded.... yet it is important to remain focused on the standards of today and respect them... anyways enough rambling....
- ldw0
i do not design in 640 anymore. i always start out in 800x600, and do not that often support 640 anymore. i mean, COMEON!
- welded0
I'll stick with 800x600 as the minimum for now. Some stuff might work at smaller resolutions, but that would basically be by fluke.
I don't surf at fullscreen, it's just too wide for non-fixed layouts. I really don't care to read text that's 1200 pixels wide.
And for what it's worth, my god is one badass fucking robot. It smites heathens with it's eye lasers.
- Tephlon0
Actually i have to design for 760 x 520, because on a 800x600 resolution the browser takes away a lot of the screen-estate.
This, of course, is for a internetportal, so we are bound by that for another 2 years, at least.
Right now, everything we design is 760+ x 520+ (extendible)
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaargh!
- mydo0
i surf a 800 x 600 - i think it's good practise as a web designer.
(two monitors - woo hoo)but screen resolutions depends on user. newstoday is for can get away with not working on 800 x 600 (cheeky though) sites used by everyone, like royalmail, should work on every res.
surely.
- unknown0
"God doesn't control computer resolutions - you think God would have come up with 640x480?"
God is in the details.
=)
- n_smooth0
I agree with unfittoprint. I can see a reversal in the current trends and we'll all be designing for small devices. The most liekly outcome will be that we will design flexible sites that work on anything from 320*320 right up to 1600*1200!
- beedee0
no time soon. almost all the statistics say 800x600 is what 50% of the web is running.
However, even if 800x600 was replaced by 1024x768 or even 1280x1024, it would not be smart to start making sites any bigger than 800x600 considering most people running in higher resolutions do so in order to have more screen space for multiple applications.
I'm willing to bet that most of NT users run in between 1280x1024 and 1920x1080, and I'm also willing to bet that mabye 5% browse the web with a their browser maximized.
I never maximize my browser, and no one else here at work does that I know of either.
So if you're asking this because you want to make sites that are larger than 760x500, well then you'd better wait.
If you can't create a solid design in 760x500, odds are you haven't found a very effective or efficient layout for your design problem.
- bedenken0
The issue I always run into here at work is being able to print pages. I do not surf maximized.