Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Programming > HTML > designing to fit into screen resolution

Reply
Thread Tools

designing to fit into screen resolution

 
 
aa
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-15-2007
what is the most common screen resolution these days?
For what resolution do you usualy design?
What is the technique to designe an HTMP page which would automatically fit
into the resolution set on a particalar Windows installation?


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
J.O. Aho
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-15-2007
aa wrote:
> what is the most common screen resolution these days?


I would guess 1024x768, seen this resolution on all to many 17" and 19"
monitors (TFT/CRT), kind of people who thinks the text and icons becomes too
small if you use anything higher.


> For what resolution do you usualy design?


Depends a bit on what I'm working on, but trying to see to that it's usable
from 800x600 (which is kind of the size of my browser window, I never like to
have full screen).


> What is the technique to designe an HTMP page which would automatically fit
> into the resolution set on a particalar Windows installation?


Why limit to microsoft? The number of Unix based/like desktop machines does
increase each day, so make it work in any OS and any browser.

--

//Aho
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
David Segall
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-15-2007
"aa" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>what is the most common screen resolution these days?

The wonderful thing about standards is that there are so many to
choose from
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Vector_Video_Standards.png>. I
would guess that XGA (1024x76 is currently the most common. I think
that aspect ratio is as important as resolution and I don't think you
should design for this 4:3 aspect ratio. The boom in "wide screen" LCD
televisions has resulted in a price drop for the 16:9 and 16:10 aspect
ratio LCDs which will be reflected in the coming sales of computer
monitors.
>For what resolution do you usualy design?

I try, and fail, to make them acceptable from 800x600 to my own
current 1680x1050 screen.
>What is the technique to designe an HTMP page which would automatically fit
>into the resolution set on a particalar Windows installation?

Print media provides a reasonable guide and they vary the number of
columns on a printed page to compensate for changes in the width of
the page. I don't know of any way to do that in HTML.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Michael Fesser
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-15-2007
..oO(David Segall)

>"aa" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>what is the most common screen resolution these days?

>
>The wonderful thing about standards is that there are so many to
>choose from
><http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Vector_Video_Standards.png>. I
>would guess that XGA (1024x76 is currently the most common. I think
>that aspect ratio is as important as resolution and I don't think you
>should design for this 4:3 aspect ratio. The boom in "wide screen" LCD
>televisions has resulted in a price drop for the 16:9 and 16:10 aspect
>ratio LCDs which will be reflected in the coming sales of computer
>monitors.


What has a website to do at all with the aspect ratio of your monitor?

Micha
 
Reply With Quote
 
aa
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-15-2007
Thanks, everybody.
Because of my eyesight I have 800x600 on my 19" TFT and I know I am guite
unusual in that.
When I looked it what I did on 1024x768 the margins are too big.
After reading the posts above I have an impression that having versions for
800x600 and for 1024x768 and this should cover the bulk of the users. I am
not sure about fluid design for I use composite pictures which are assembled
from several small fragmets sometimes superimposing using
style="position:absolute; top:;left:";


 
Reply With Quote
 
dorayme
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-15-2007
In article
<45abcc1a$0$8759$(E-Mail Removed)>,
"aa" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> Thanks, everybody.
> I am
> not sure about fluid design for I use composite pictures which are assembled
> from several small fragmets sometimes superimposing using
> style="position:absolute; top:;left:";



Your website is basically pictures? You are set on this course?
Let me not judge that I be not judged.

Look into specifying all your widths for all the pics in % terms
in the css only (not the html). Let the browser calculate the
widths if you cannot work them out. With some luck it will work
over a lot of resolutions and screen sizes.

What you do is look at the whole and think the width 100%, look
at all the fragments and get the proportional widths of each. id
each fragment in the html and enter the width as an instruction
in the css. It should be fun.

--
dorayme
 
Reply With Quote
 
J.O. Aho
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-15-2007
dorayme wrote:
> In article "aa" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:


>> I am
>> not sure about fluid design for I use composite pictures which are assembled
>> from several small fragmets sometimes superimposing using
>> style="position:absolute; top:;left:";

> Your website is basically pictures? You are set on this course?
> Let me not judge that I be not judged.
>
> Look into specifying all your widths for all the pics in % terms
> in the css only (not the html). Let the browser calculate the
> widths if you cannot work them out. With some luck it will work
> over a lot of resolutions and screen sizes.


I'm not as much for this solution

Say your images are or high quality/resolution, even if the browser window
is small, the amount of data sent is the same, still many in US seems to use
modems, no gain for them of having a small resolution.

Say your images are of low quality/resolution, when your browser window is
big, the images are scaled up and looking really crappy.

In this case I would rather have two different setups of images, yes it's more
work, but you make things look okey and you get more speed when getting to
"low quality" version of the site.


--

//Aho
 
Reply With Quote
 
Andy Dingley
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-15-2007

aa wrote:

> Because of my eyesight I have 800x600 on my 19" TFT


You'll get better results if you always set your display to the ideal
resolution that your TFT display is designed for (1280 x 1024 ?) and
then adjust the desktop font size and possibly the browser default size
until the text is a convenient size.

There is no reason why poor eyesight should ever require you to lower
the display resolution, particularly with a display that has such a
strong attachment to particular resolutions. Use all those pixels you
paid for, and use more pixels per character.

 
Reply With Quote
 
dorayme
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-15-2007
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
"J.O. Aho" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> dorayme wrote:
> > In article "aa" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>
> >> I am
> >> not sure about fluid design for I use composite pictures which are
> >> assembled
> >> from several small fragmets...

> > Your website is basically pictures? You are set on this course?
> > Let me not judge that I be not judged.
> >
> > Look into specifying all your widths for all the pics in % terms
> > in the css only (not the html).
> >

> I'm not as much for this solution
>


Of course you are right. Neither am I. It is a bad idea to be
making a website based on sliced up pics in the first place. But
the point is this, if you are set on doing this, there are going
to be a fair number of disadvantages. Either for you to make
various websites for various resolutions and somehow sniff them
out to apply the appropriate or else to cause some unnecessary
download pain to those with small/low res screens. The keyword
here is unnecessary. One should be making pics reasonably quick
to load even for a 19" screen.

Browsers scale pics down with reasonable quality and (along with
just about everything else but an earthling artist) do a lousy
job of scaling up many pics (hard to get something out of
nothing, easy to leave out some from more). Having said this,
Safari and FF and some other browsers (at least on Macs) do a
good job if the emming or %ing is set well in the first place,
but is rather disappointing in IE on a Winbox last time I looked.

> Say your images are or high quality/resolution, even if the browser window
> is small, the amount of data sent is the same, still many in US seems to use
> modems, no gain for them of having a small resolution.
>
> Say your images are of low quality/resolution, when your browser window is
> big, the images are scaled up and looking really crappy.
>
> In this case I would rather have two different setups of images, yes it's
> more
> work, but you make things look okey and you get more speed when getting to
> "low quality" version of the site.


--
dorayme
 
Reply With Quote
 
dorayme
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-15-2007
In article
<(E-Mail Removed). com>,
"Andy Dingley" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> aa wrote:
>
> > Because of my eyesight I have 800x600 on my 19" TFT

>
> You'll get better results if you always set your display to the ideal
> resolution that your TFT display is designed for (1280 x 1024 ?) and
> then adjust the desktop font size and possibly the browser default size
> until the text is a convenient size.
>
> There is no reason why poor eyesight should ever require you to lower
> the display resolution, particularly with a display that has such a
> strong attachment to particular resolutions. Use all those pixels you
> paid for, and use more pixels per character.


This is good advice where text is concerned. Pity that so often
one has to look at pictures of text. But really, a 19" on 800x600
suggests a third solution is needed. For which one needs to know
the platform. I think it likely that native res for the screen
may well be part of it, but it is not certain.

--
dorayme
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
designing to fit into screen resolution aa HTML 9 01-18-2007 06:19 PM
Screen placement based on screen resolution Pat Python 5 04-08-2006 03:10 PM
j2me, scale image to fit screen size. Boki Java 7 10-27-2005 12:21 PM
Make wxListCtrl fit around contents and parent frame fit around listctrl Piet Python 0 07-18-2004 08:27 AM
Can't get the tables to fit 100% accross the screen Richard Burgess HTML 3 09-11-2003 04:12 PM



Advertisments