Reading mode: Light Dark

monitor resolution poll- OT

Go to last post
I wish all graphics on the web were vector graphics. That would make life so simple.

The reality is that MOST people on the internet will use the windows default of 640x480 or 800x600. I have found that a lot of people don't even know how to change their resolution.

--
Frank
http://www.adventurousduo.com
 
I use mine at 800 x 600 and in fact, most monitor resolutions are set at this and most web pages are created treating 800 x 600 as the default. I do a bit of web work and most clients want this resolution based web pages.

Regards, Vikas
Dwight1973 said:
mortal said:
Hi all, I would like to know what resolution everyone has their
monitor set at. I am working on a webpage and realized that I was
making it look good for 1152X864 (my setting). But I am betting
that most people use 1024 x 768. In that case I should shrink all
my graphics a bit. I figure noone who practices photography would
be any lower than 1024 though..
--
Scott A.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
Regards, Vikas Malhotra

http://www.pbase.com/vikasmal/sonyf707pictures
 
mortal said:
Hi all, I would like to know what resolution everyone has their
monitor set at. I am working on a webpage and realized that I was
making it look good for 1152X864 (my setting). But I am betting
that most people use 1024 x 768. In that case I should shrink all
my graphics a bit. I figure noone who practices photography would
be any lower than 1024 though..
--
Scott A.
Click to expand...
 
I guess that because a lot of people still use 1024 x 768 (or lower), software applications tend to have toolbars etc sized accordingly.

I find that increasing the screen resolution often makes the text in toolbars, buttons etc. too small for comfort.

--

David Barker
 
mortal said:
Hi all, I would like to know what resolution everyone has their
monitor set at. I am working on a webpage and realized that I was
making it look good for 1152X864 (my setting). But I am betting
that most people use 1024 x 768. In that case I should shrink all
my graphics a bit. I figure noone who practices photography would
be any lower than 1024 though..
--
Scott A.
Click to expand...
Desktops 1280x1024 LCD & Trinitron dual monitors both at work and home

Notebooks 1024x768 both work and home.

Mohan
 
Well I must say I am surprised that anyone uses 800x600 anymore. I knew that this was the standard for webpages but I figured maybe this was getting a bit old school by now. I was thinking that 1024 x 768 would be minimum these days. I guess there are still a lot of people out there with 15 inch monitors...Personally I can't even stand to go down to 1024 x768 Thanks everyone for replying.

--
Scott A.
 
TrekSF6 said:
Well I must say I am surprised that anyone uses 800x600 anymore. I
knew that this was the standard for webpages but I figured maybe
this was getting a bit old school by now.
Click to expand...
One should not make this kind of poll in a very tech savvy forum. It is as bad as asking F1 race drivers what is the avg driving speed they do when they are racing. Dont expect 55 mph to be their answer.

Because you still have those WebTV viwers, and plenty of non-techno-savvy computer users who dont even know the differences between RAM and HD, and those that are still stuck with 56k modems. This is why when it comes to designing a web site we still need to stay with the old school "miniumal" thinking and not try to always do the fancy stuff.

--
jc
F707 w/ Nikon 5T/6T
http://www.reefkeepers.org/gallery/f707
http://www.reeftec.com/gallery
 
Jimmy Chen said:
Jimmy Chen said:
Well I must say I am surprised that anyone uses 800x600 anymore. I
knew that this was the standard for webpages but I figured maybe
this was getting a bit old school by now.
Click to expand...
One should not make this kind of poll in a very tech savvy forum.
It is as bad as asking F1 race drivers what is the avg driving
speed they do when they are racing. Dont expect 55 mph to be their
answer.

Because you still have those WebTV viwers, and plenty of
non-techno-savvy computer users who dont even know the differences
between RAM and HD, and those that are still stuck with 56k modems.
This is why when it comes to designing a web site we still need to
stay with the old school "miniumal" thinking and not try to always
do the fancy stuff.
Click to expand...
Very well put Jimmy. This isn't going to be as much fun as I thought... I think for individual images (such as buttons or icons) I will size as if they were viewed at 1024x768 or better. But for the overall size of the pages I will cater to the 800 x 600 crowd. The site will be for displaying photographs and a photography theme in general, so I figure most people who stop by are going to be more tech savvy anyway. I don't want these 1600 x 1200 people getting a magnifying glass out saying "wth is that thing?"
Scott A.
 
Hi, I am at 1024 on a 19" tube.
mortal said:
Hi all, I would like to know what resolution everyone has their
monitor set at. I am working on a webpage and realized that I was
making it look good for 1152X864 (my setting). But I am betting
that most people use 1024 x 768. In that case I should shrink all
my graphics a bit. I figure noone who practices photography would
be any lower than 1024 though..
--
Scott A.
Click to expand...
--
=Roy=
 
I found the following web page very helpful in designing a fixed 800x600 resolution web page. It works out great if one has 800x600, plus gives options to utilize extra real estate if a user has a larger resolution without compromising the main content which resides in the 800x600.
It is a worth while read on web design.

http://www.echoecho.com/dzine005.htm

Lan-Lord
 
I am a professional web developer and statistics gathered from the 100+ web sites I manage show that most people use 800 X 600 resolution followed closely by 1024 x 768
mortal said:
Hi all, I would like to know what resolution everyone has their
monitor set at. I am working on a webpage and realized that I was
making it look good for 1152X864 (my setting). But I am betting
that most people use 1024 x 768. In that case I should shrink all
my graphics a bit. I figure noone who practices photography would
be any lower than 1024 though..
--
Scott A.
Click to expand...
--
Michael Stone
http://www.pbase.com/mbstone
C2100
There are no strangers. Only friends we haven't met.
 
Thats because the graphic was created improperly the background should have been made 1600 pixels wide so as not to repeat
Stephen Peszel said:
1400x1050 on my Sony laptop
1600x1024 on my home 19" desktop
1024x768 on my work desktop 15" piece of junk
Many web pages show incorrectly that use a graphic depicting a
notebook or similar in the margin, the "margin" repeats about2/3rd
across the screen, most annoying. Good luck.
--
Barking up the wrong creek without a paddle.
http://www.pbase.com/speszel/galleries
Click to expand...
--
Michael Stone
http://www.pbase.com/mbstone
C2100
There are no strangers. Only friends we haven't met.
 
Dual 17's running 1152 x 864....
 
I'm also using 1600 X 1200 on a 19" monitor . . . but it only cost me $150 at Fry's . . . and beats the pants of myf old Nanao 15" monitor (which really was a 14" monitor because they lied back in those day) that cost me $700. I"ve run every test known, and compared it to my work's CAD monitor's, and it's equal to anything that it over a few year's old. Progress is wonderful.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top