| Sign in: |
| Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features. |
|
|
|
|
|| SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board
Website Monitor Resolution?
Robert Seale, Photographer
 |
Houston | TX | USA | Posted: 8:20 PM on 02.15.10 |
->> For years we've been designing our websites within the parameters of 1024 x 768 monitor resolution. Even the smallest Macbooks operate at 1280 x 800, the 15" MacBook Pros are now 1440 x900. I would think that most people's desktop computers are even higher.
Is 1024 x 768 still a good idea, or an antiquated concept? Does anyone still use a computer (or, more importantly, know of a client/non-photographer person) that works at this rather limited resolution? Any thoughts on this?
Just polling the audience. I suppose I could also look at analytics on this, but I thought I would ask. |
|
Matthew Rosenberg, Photographer
|
Charlottesville | VA | United States | Posted: 8:39 PM on 02.15.10 |
->> I just took a look at our site's analytics. Unfortunately, 1024x768 is still the dominant monitor resolution over the last year. 31.3% of our several million visitors used that resolution followed by 1280 x 800 at 17%.
It is like IE7. It just.... won't..... die........ |
|
Israel Shirk, Photographer, Assistant
|
Boise | ID | US | Posted: 9:39 PM on 02.15.10 |
->> Yeah, 1024x768 is still standard if you're using fixed width.
I have plenty of clients who are still at the low limit of this - they're usually working from a small laptops, netbooks, sometimes iPhones (though I've been customizing for the iPhone on most of my recent web development work)
So glad IE 6 is getting dropped by Google! CSS selectors will finally work! Now if they could just get CSS3 and standards compliance working like all the people without multibillion dollar budgets... |
|
Alan Look, Photographer
|
Bloomington/Normal | IL | United States | Posted: 9:52 PM on 02.15.10 |
| ->> My analytics still show 1024 x 768 in first with a bit over 1 in 5 visitors at that level. |
|
Joel Hawksley, Student/Intern, Photographer
|
Kent | OH | USA | Posted: 9:56 PM on 02.15.10 |
->> I've found the opposite to be the case. Web resolutions are going down, due to the face that most if not all new computers are now widescreen, with lower vertical dimensions.
My minimum "viewport" is now 950x675. |
|
Robert Seale, Photographer
|
Houston | TX | USA | Posted: 11:17 PM on 02.15.10 |
->> I looked up my stats on Google analytics:
1440 x 900 is number one with 29.37%
several other resolutions in between....then,
1024 x 768 in 6th place with only 7.09% of traffic.
with the exception of a very small number (around 1%) at 320 x 396, the 1024 x 768 is the lowest resolution crowd out there.
Joel is right though....everyone seems to be using wider screens, so perhaps the bottom number needs to stay around 768. |
|
Chuck Steenburgh, Photographer
|
Lexington | VA | USA | Posted: 4:29 AM on 02.16.10 |
| ->> Actually, with the proliferation in netbooks...1024x768 will be around a lot longer. |
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|