[WEB4LIB] RE: Web Page Width - To Restrict or Not to Restrict

[Thomas Dowling]

Smith, Sarah wrote:
>
> ...Are there any guidelines as to
> whether one *should* or *should not* set a specific (max)
> [screen] width?


Dobbs, Aaron wrote:
> Hi Sarah,
> 
>>From a purely personal standpoint, I appreciate sites that allow dynamic
> width sizing.  I run ~1280x1024 with the window maximized (dual monitor
> - only maximised on one monitor) by default so I don't have to scroll so
> much.

As another large window user, whenever I see a page that's half wasted
space, I take it to mean the design work lacked effort, consideration,
or a clue (or some combination thereof).

Conversely, there's little to match horizontal scrolling for annoying
users and driving them to other web sites.

On our site at the moment, as best I can tell, about 25% of our users
run at 800x600, about 60% at 1024x768, and about 15% above that,
including about 1280x1024--which, btw, is the only resolution supported
by the $300 17" LCD monitors coming with a lot of your users' new PCs.
If we're representative, any width you pick is wrong for at least 40% of
users; any width you pick that doesn't lead to horizontal scrolling
leaves a growing bloc of your users with a window that's about one-third
unused space.

[What's important, of course, is *window* width, but amazingly to me,
users continue to run apps mostly full screen, minus window chrome,
scrollbars, sidebars, etc.]

IMO, whatever need there once was for fixed-width pages is long gone, as
is any sort of homogeneity in users' display environments.


-- 
Thomas Dowling
tdowling at ohiolink.edu