Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: FreeTerran on August 10, 2003, 03:07:03 pm
-
Which screen resolution do you have its important for me to know it because i make an new Cold-Space (http://www.cold-space..com) website and i get heavy trouble with the images in a 800x600 resolution so...plz vote ;)
-
1024*768, cuz, uh, well... I only got a 17" monitor, and I already toasted one exactly like it by setting the res too high.
-
I think 1024x768 is best for websites; it's the most commonly used and it seems to fit most things well enough. I use higher myself, but I keep my favorites bar open and so it brings the width back down. Don't go 800x600, but I wouldn't go higher than 1024 either.
-
Well i have an 17" monitor too and have an 1280x1024
it will be optimized for 1024x768 and higher
-
Design it 1024*768 - should get away with that on most machines.
-
1024*768, but only because my Mac windows GUI thingy looks funky on other resolutions.
-
I design all my websites for 640x480. For two reasons:
a. Using a horizontally-centred table of fixed width, the page actually still looks great on 1024x768. In fact, it's stylish.
b. For the hell of it. For old laptops. For communism.
-
The guys with a 640x480 resolution have bad luck and if i see right in my win xp desktop setings is'nt an 640x480 the lesses i can get is 800x600 or maybe its the gfx driver
-
I have 1024x768, and sometimes when I decide to use Starcraft editor 1280x1024. But I am on net always at 1024x768.
Why did you put less than 640x480 into the poll? As I know windows 9x, NT, Me and any other op systems don't support 512x384 for example.
-
I use 1280x1024. It makes all images look better...
-
I just got my eyes adjusted to 1152x864, and I'm planning to move one higher next week or something, but as far as websites go, I'd go with 1024x768
-
Originally posted by FreeTerran
The guys with a 640x480 resolution have bad luck and if i see right in my win xp desktop setings is'nt an 640x480 the lesses i can get is 800x600 or maybe its the gfx driver
Probably because XP has too much GUI crap taking up space for there to be more than a few pixels of usable area at 640x480.
-
1600x1200 :cool:
-
Your kidding right? You must have a heck of a time trying to click on "My Computer"
-
I just figure if you can read text, the res isn't high enough
-
My vid card doesn't support higher than 1280 x 1024... :(
lol! 1280 x768 is funny! HD Specs...
-
My vid card supports up to 2048 x 1536. My monitor is another deal entirely :p
-
1024x768@100 (or mostly 85 these days as I haven't worked out how to make XFree86 drive my display at 100 yet) because that appears to be the "sweet spot" for my monitor.
-
1600x1200@24bpp@100Hz. Xfree86 is looking good. :)
-
Hertz, huh? My monitor doesn't supprot more than 75, and anything higher than 60 is squiggly lines... Well, that's what I get for having a Korean monitor... :p (No, not hyundai)
-
1024 until I get the cash for a big monitor...
-
1600 x 1200, and no problem clicking on my gnome desktop icons :D
-
The standard to stick with is 1024- anyone lower generally won't have the hardware to view a reasonably image-intensive website properly anyway, so 1024 is the lowest common denominator. Also, formatting your website for 800x600 is a surefire way to make it look like **** to 90% of the populace.
-
The resolution-whorism in this thread is appalling. Yes, I run at 1024x768 (or 1152x864 at work). But the fact is that only incompetence stands in the way of designing a site that looks good whether it's running at 800x600 or 1280x1024.
And Odyssey, those fixed-width centered-column designs are godawful, because more and more screen space is wasted as the resolution increases.
FreeTerran, if your site design includes 800x600 bitmaps (or blue-on-black text)... please get someone to break your fingers.
-
1024*768, as although my GFX card can support up to something utterly incredible, my ****ty monitor can't go any higher, and it's got a crap refresh rate, too.
Damn Belinea.
-
current rez is 1280x960@75Hz
-
I really need to run a higher resolution, as when you have as many icons as I have (103), 1024*768 just isn't enough.
-
Originally posted by Ryx
current rez is 1280x960@75Hz
1280x768@70Hz... ;7
...for the moment at least.
-
/me goes on about having no idea why people use 1280x1024 at all again...
<--Uses 1280x960@80hz
design it in 1024x768 though
-
well well there we go first viewable screen is done its a screen in 1280x1024
(http://www.swooh.com/peon/FreeTerran/website.jpg)
comments ?
EDIT: view it with PSP or something else because of the size[/B]
-
Why did you just put it up and give us a link....:doubt:
Doesn't look that bad.
-
Because its not done only the style and i want that you guys know for what you vote ;)
-
Ach! Ist Montag?! *loft*
-
:wtf: What else...
spam...
-
Originally posted by FreeTerran
comments ?
EDIT: view it with PSP or something else because of the size [/B]
Well, as long as the main panel is scalable, I'll give you ½ of a :yes:
Watch your fonts and contrasts, because very few people will like the page if you have the same color scheme as your posts here.
-
Originally posted by FreeTerran
:wtf: What else...
spam...
ROFL! I'm sorry, I just wanted to see the extent of my German speaking skillz. That was it. :p
-
Originally posted by StratComm
Well, as long as the main panel is scalable, I'll give you ½ of a :yes:
Watch your fonts and contrasts, because very few people will like the page if you have the same color scheme as your posts here.
I think the schema is good i can good read it let me post an better screen with text...
(http://www.swooh.com/peon/FreeTerran/website2.jpg)
-
that is readable, unlike your posts here (change to a lighter color, plz)
-
better ?
-
Originally posted by ZylonBane
And Odyssey, those fixed-width centered-column designs are godawful, because more and more screen space is wasted as the resolution increases.
Exactly. It punishes those with enough money to be able to afford a graphics card and monitor that supports stupidly large resolutions.
Anyway, if you're using a large resolution, you need a large screen. Hence, the actual page ought to be roughly the same size whatever resolution, since dot pitch between displays ought to remain relatively constant. Unless, as I said before, the person is bloody rich, in which case they can suffer :)
-
Originally posted by ZylonBane
The resolution-whorism in this thread is appalling. Yes, I run at 1024x768 (or 1152x864 at work). But the fact is that only incompetence stands in the way of designing a site that looks good whether it's running at 800x600 or 1280x1024.
And Odyssey, those fixed-width centered-column designs are godawful, because more and more screen space is wasted as the resolution increases.
FreeTerran, if your site design includes 800x600 bitmaps (or blue-on-black text)... please get someone to break your fingers.
Bugger me dead. Something I agree with ZB about. Everything this man said is absolutely correct. Listen to him.
Originally posted by Odyssey
:
Exactly. It punishes those with enough money to be able to afford a graphics card and monitor that supports stupidly large resolutions.
Anyway, if you're using a large resolution, you need a large screen. Hence, the actual page ought to be roughly the same size whatever resolution, since dot pitch between displays ought to remain relatively constant. Unless, as I said before, the person is bloody rich, in which case they can suffer
Personally, I'd have to say that you left your mind in the blender too long. Making a website that looks decent from 640x480 on up to 1600x1200 isn't all that hard with even some half-baked knowledge of CSS and Javascript. You can make it even easier with some PHP. If you feel like you need to 'punish' visitors to your website, you've kinda missed the whole point of having a website.
-
Originally posted by FreeTerran
better ?
Well...white is better, hence the reason we're all posting in white.
-
Well since he [probably] knows that the human eye is attracted to the blue end of the color spectrem, he wants to have blue text so people will listen to what he has to say(which is relatively nothing)... anyway..
.
People voted for 1024x768 most, and you make it in 1280x1024? Heh, whats the point of voting? :p
-
CUAS I WANRT TOO OPLL EOPLPE!!!
-
Some questions are not meant to be asked. No, seriously, you'll be dumber for having heard the answer, I guarantee it.
-
Originally posted by DragonClaw
People voted for 1024x768 most, and you make it in 1280x1024? Heh, whats the point of voting? :p
Dude i have not say that i made it for 1280x1024 its optimized for 1024x768 but my screen resolution is 1280x1024 and so the screenshot too
-
As a web designer my self, the common resolution for gaming websites is 1024x768+ at 24-bit+ :D
Heres a nifty part of Macromedia that might help...
Browser Resolutions (http://www.macromedia.com/support/flash/ts/documents/movie_size01.htm) ;) this info can be very useful for determining how much space you have available for which res for the website :nod:
as for the layout I won't comment until its online..:p
-
Originally posted by mikhael
Personally, I'd have to say that you left your mind in the blender too long. Making a website that looks decent from 640x480 on up to 1600x1200 isn't all that hard with even some half-baked knowledge of CSS and Javascript. You can make it even easier with some PHP. If you feel like you need to 'punish' visitors to your website, you've kinda missed the whole point of having a website.
Aw, c'mon. CSS + Javascript + PHP = compatability nightmare. That's why I stick to tables. I design to the lowest denominator - text browser, 640x480.
And if people aren't at the lowest denominator, it gives 'em a use for Opera's zoom function :)
I don't feel the need to punish people, really. They'd have done in their eyes enough already by running small screens at high res.
-
Originally posted by FreeTerran
better ?
ahh... yes. thansk
-
Originally posted by Odyssey
Aw, c'mon. CSS + Javascript + PHP = compatability nightmare. That's why I stick to tables. I design to the lowest denominator - text browser, 640x480.
I don't think any of those are a compatibility nightmare!! :p Maybe you should visit World Wide Web Consortium (www.w3c.org) once in a while or perhaps the PHP site developers' site...
And if people aren't at the lowest denominator, it gives 'em a use for Opera's zoom function :)
Opera I use, but think they are a lot of sh** because there popup window isn't outside the window!!! :mad:
I don't feel the need to punish people, really. They'd have done in their eyes enough already by running small screens at high res.
Game sites are always demanding on processor power so thats why they use 1024x768 resolution! :nod:
-
Originally posted by Max
Opera I use, but think they are a lot of sh** because there popup window isn't outside the window!!! :mad:
It's supposed to be like that by default. If you don't like it, change the settings so it opens new windows. Alternatively, just hit F12, then choose "Open requested pop-up windows only", and it'll block all the ones you don't want.