To all the web page designers...
- DeafinONEear
- steve albini likes it
- Posts: 373
- Joined: Fri May 02, 2003 12:24 pm
- Location: San Francisco
To all the web page designers...
I want to know what you all think is the default size that people view at... I'm building sites for both myself and my band right now and my drummer insists that I should shoot for 800x600, not 1024x768.
what do you think?
oh, and to frame or not to frame... that is the question....
thanks!
what do you think?
oh, and to frame or not to frame... that is the question....
thanks!
Re: To all the web page designers...
www.thesubjectofus.com
It's nothing fancy, but I cater to those that actually have a decent monitor and vid card so I designed it for 1024. Forget 800x600 IMO, time for people to upgrade.
Oh, and it's frames. I like it like that. No need to reload the same images every click.
It's nothing fancy, but I cater to those that actually have a decent monitor and vid card so I designed it for 1024. Forget 800x600 IMO, time for people to upgrade.
Oh, and it's frames. I like it like that. No need to reload the same images every click.
-Chris
http://www.ctmsound.com
http://www.ctmsound.com
- stevemoss
- alignin' 24-trk
- Posts: 58
- Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2003 8:09 pm
- Location: Saratoga Springs, NY
- Contact:
Re: To all the web page designers...
I don't think there's necessarily a "standard size" people view at anymore, though generally designing a site to roughly fit at 800x600 is a good idea.
While it would be nice for people to simply up their resolution, it seems ineffective to try to force that mindset on the people you're asking to check out your band's website - if they aren't able to easily see what they're after, you've lost them.Forget 800x600 IMO, time for people to upgrade.
- apropos of nothing
- dead but not forgotten
- Posts: 2193
- Joined: Tue May 13, 2003 6:29 am
- Location: Minneapolis, MN
- Contact:
Re: To all the web page designers...
To my mind, a good web-page will look nearly as good on whatever platform you load it on, be it an 800x600 old Mac or a PC with a 21" monitor cranked up to 1600x1280. We had our's designed like that, I'd say successfully.
- the velour fog
- buyin' a studio
- Posts: 874
- Joined: Wed May 07, 2003 9:38 am
Re: To all the web page designers...
IMHO I always use 800x600 and no frames. frames can jumble things up, especially if the viewer does not have the same screen size format. you'd be surprised at the things you can do with 800x600 and some tables.
a website i did for a friend who makes some great pedals.
http://www.catalinbread.com
a website i did for a friend who makes some great pedals.
http://www.catalinbread.com
"Set Phasers to Extra Slow."
- transmothra
- gimme a little kick & snare
- Posts: 91
- Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2003 12:21 pm
- Location: Dayton, OH
- Contact:
Re: To all the web page designers...
ALWAYS use percentage widths instead of fixed values. that way, it will stretch or shrink according to the user's screen/browser size. and use the validator at www.w3.org - it'll save you a lot of trouble as well.
example:
example:
Code: Select all
<table width="100%">
<tr>
<td width="50%"></td>
<td width="25%"></td>
<td width="25%"></td>
</tr>
</table>
...do you believe that?
Scarlett 212 1st Gen | Reaper | PreSonus Eris E5/A-T ATH-M20x
transmothra.com
Scarlett 212 1st Gen | Reaper | PreSonus Eris E5/A-T ATH-M20x
transmothra.com
- transmothra
- gimme a little kick & snare
- Posts: 91
- Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2003 12:21 pm
- Location: Dayton, OH
- Contact:
Re: To all the web page designers...
i should add that if you absolutely MUST use fixed widths, then go for the smaller of the two most prevalent resolutions (800*600, rather than 1024*768), because it's less annoying to have a small content area than it is to have a horizontal scrollbar!
i believe - and i could be vastly mistaken, since i haven't actually checked in months - that 800*600 is still slightly more prevalent than 1024*768, but it's mainly just because people don't know how to change it, or don't know that they can change it. also, you'll see mo' bigga screens in offices than in homes, so keep that in mind as well. again, nothing beats a "liquid" layout (one that uses percentages for lengths), although this of course can get tricky when graphics are a major part of your layout, and/or are integrated too deeply with the layout itself. images (and some Flash) generally look awful with percentage sizes, so they should remain as fixed-size elements.
i believe - and i could be vastly mistaken, since i haven't actually checked in months - that 800*600 is still slightly more prevalent than 1024*768, but it's mainly just because people don't know how to change it, or don't know that they can change it. also, you'll see mo' bigga screens in offices than in homes, so keep that in mind as well. again, nothing beats a "liquid" layout (one that uses percentages for lengths), although this of course can get tricky when graphics are a major part of your layout, and/or are integrated too deeply with the layout itself. images (and some Flash) generally look awful with percentage sizes, so they should remain as fixed-size elements.
...do you believe that?
Scarlett 212 1st Gen | Reaper | PreSonus Eris E5/A-T ATH-M20x
transmothra.com
Scarlett 212 1st Gen | Reaper | PreSonus Eris E5/A-T ATH-M20x
transmothra.com
- wing
- on a wing and a prayer
- Posts: 5375
- Joined: Fri May 02, 2003 12:00 pm
- Location: brooklyn, ny
- Contact:
Re: To all the web page designers...
always go with 800x600. you won't believe how many are using that resolution-- it's quite often set as standard on computers, and people don't know how to change it. better safe than sorry, because if your website isn't easy to look at, you'll lose visitors. you just have to consider your audience... is it general audience? or computer dorks who have big monitors and what not?
- cassembler
- suffering 'studio suck'
- Posts: 414
- Joined: Wed May 07, 2003 8:38 am
- Location: control room
- Contact:
Re: To all the web page designers...
I vote for a combo of the above...Transmothra had it right. 800x600 minimum with scalable fields so it will fill up a screen regardless of a size. Check out staticassembly.com and view the source to see how I did it.
here's the table source:
That very first row is a jpg that's about 700 px wide-ish (never forget the scrollbars!!!). The left and right column widths of the table are 33%, making the center column 33% or the width of that picture, whichever is greater. IIRC, the table was centered by making the left and right padding (or whatever) be 33% as well in the css file.
The result is a centered, scalable table, for what it's worth.
EDIT: clarity & technical
here's the table source:
Code: Select all
<table class="main">
<tr>
<th colspan=3><img src="staticassembly.jpg" alt="staticassembly web site"></th>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width=33%><a class="mtlink" href="mission.htm" onmouseover="turnon(this);"onmouseout="turnoff(this);">mission</a></td>
<td rowspan=4><img src="sky.jpg" alt="picture"></td>
<td width=33%><a class="mtlink" href="cast.htm" onmouseover="turnon(this);" onmouseout="turnoff(this);">cast</a></td>
</tr>
The result is a centered, scalable table, for what it's worth.
EDIT: clarity & technical
http://www.dfwsound.com (production co)
http://www.dfwsoundvision.com (studio)
"Man is doomed to perpetually fluctuate between states of extreme boredom and extreme turbulence."
http://www.dfwsoundvision.com (studio)
"Man is doomed to perpetually fluctuate between states of extreme boredom and extreme turbulence."
- wing
- on a wing and a prayer
- Posts: 5375
- Joined: Fri May 02, 2003 12:00 pm
- Location: brooklyn, ny
- Contact:
Re: To all the web page designers...
nerds...
- DeafinONEear
- steve albini likes it
- Posts: 373
- Joined: Fri May 02, 2003 12:24 pm
- Location: San Francisco
Re: To all the web page designers...
you guys fucking rule... right now html looks like Martian, but I'm learning... thanks... back in a little bit.
- DeafinONEear
- steve albini likes it
- Posts: 373
- Joined: Fri May 02, 2003 12:24 pm
- Location: San Francisco
Re: To all the web page designers...
actually, I'm using Dreamweaver and I was wondering if there is a way to set as default the use of fixed ratio... or is that all done in html. or is it a moot point. or.... I wish I knew this-- it's my drummers copy and he's on vacation, yet somehow I got elected to do the site.. go figure.
- tateeskew
- steve albini likes it
- Posts: 320
- Joined: Tue May 13, 2003 2:36 pm
- Location: noisetown
- Contact:
Re: To all the web page designers...
ok, i'm jumping in here a little late, but here is some info for you.
personally, i am all for web-standards and like to see everyone conforming to them so that sites are clean and, yep tapeop board users, FAST.
now, i personally wouldn't use any tables in my site. the new standard is to use html for content and your stylesheet for layout.
take a look here: http://webstandards.org/
Once you understand using CSS a little more, it's much easier to create layout AND you conform to the new XHTML and CSS standards of separating content from style.
here are a couple of links to some quick use stylesheets for different layouts if you are ready to learn:
http://www.glish.com/css/
http://www.fu2k.org/alex/css/
oh, and to answer your original question. go with 800x600 and you won't need frames if following the standards. also, reloading pictures after the first time it is loaded will happen from cache, so no data is transmitted from server to client.
personally, i am all for web-standards and like to see everyone conforming to them so that sites are clean and, yep tapeop board users, FAST.
now, i personally wouldn't use any tables in my site. the new standard is to use html for content and your stylesheet for layout.
take a look here: http://webstandards.org/
Once you understand using CSS a little more, it's much easier to create layout AND you conform to the new XHTML and CSS standards of separating content from style.
here are a couple of links to some quick use stylesheets for different layouts if you are ready to learn:
http://www.glish.com/css/
http://www.fu2k.org/alex/css/
oh, and to answer your original question. go with 800x600 and you won't need frames if following the standards. also, reloading pictures after the first time it is loaded will happen from cache, so no data is transmitted from server to client.
Re: To all the web page designers...
Learn basic HTML first then go with dreamweaver. It will help if you know what you are asking it to do. Simple really is better. Don't even bother with flash. Flash is getting really old. Nothing is more annoying to me then a flash pop up. Flash is like velcro instead of shoe laces. It's just not necessary.
I put my website together at work with notepad. except for intro page. That was me experimenting with adobe Photoshop.
http://www.hunchbackstudio.com
I know it looks like a 6th grade project, but I like the simple layout. I plan on giving it a makeover in dreamweaver. like pick a color theme, graphic borders, and font.
I don't have any frames, just the same info on the top of each page. I only like frames when the border is hidden.
-Matt
I put my website together at work with notepad. except for intro page. That was me experimenting with adobe Photoshop.
http://www.hunchbackstudio.com
I know it looks like a 6th grade project, but I like the simple layout. I plan on giving it a makeover in dreamweaver. like pick a color theme, graphic borders, and font.
I don't have any frames, just the same info on the top of each page. I only like frames when the border is hidden.
-Matt
-Matthew Macchio$tab
- cassembler
- suffering 'studio suck'
- Posts: 414
- Joined: Wed May 07, 2003 8:38 am
- Location: control room
- Contact:
Re: To all the web page designers...
Yeah, I very VERY highly recommend using wordpad (or better yet, 1st Page 2000 freeware) and do your first site longhand.
The intent of html is only content of a site; the css(cascading style sheets) are for colors, and all of the fancy design stuff. I _think_ that tables are still cool with everyone in HTML; it would be very, very difficult to get some things (like this message board) without them.
Here's an example of a style sheet:
Using that, any body in an HTML document will have a background of black; as long as you link to the css file like this:
(you have to put that in the HEAD of the document)
a css file is merely a text file saved as css.
But anyways, learn longhand first, just a humble recommendation.
The intent of html is only content of a site; the css(cascading style sheets) are for colors, and all of the fancy design stuff. I _think_ that tables are still cool with everyone in HTML; it would be very, very difficult to get some things (like this message board) without them.
Here's an example of a style sheet:
Code: Select all
body{background-color: #000000}
table{margin-left: auto}
table{margin-right: auto}
table{text-align: center}
Code: Select all
<link rel=stylesheet type="text/css" href="common/sastyle.css">
a css file is merely a text file saved as css.
But anyways, learn longhand first, just a humble recommendation.
http://www.dfwsound.com (production co)
http://www.dfwsoundvision.com (studio)
"Man is doomed to perpetually fluctuate between states of extreme boredom and extreme turbulence."
http://www.dfwsoundvision.com (studio)
"Man is doomed to perpetually fluctuate between states of extreme boredom and extreme turbulence."
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 32 guests