Welcome to 2007. Where we don’t have flying cars, teleportation isn’t possible, the apocalypse hasn’t consumed Earth, and we are still designing for 800 x 600.
While all of the cutting edge websites are designing for 1024 x 768 and above, big industries are still focused on the ugly half-brother (ok, 3/4-brother) for usability. However, even from a usability standpoint, the likelihood of someone running 800 x 600 and having the capability to run their snazzy flash banner is very unlikely. They are probably using IE4 on a Pentium III trying to barrel through their text-only version browsing experience wondering, “Where are all the frames and animated gifs?” They just don’t make the internet like they used to. Instead, we have expandable websites, SVGs, and flash. Scrolling isn’t the problem either since most people expect to scroll in a Web 2.0 environment (more information on, statistics about, and knowledge of a “foldless” internet can be found here)
That’s not to say I don’t understand that resolution is a factor when designing for certain platforms or demographics. Yes, the iPhone is cool, can browse the web, and is tiny. That’s why Apple included the two-finger zoom feature (which is the coolest thing on the phone anyway). I know you’re thinking, “but what about the people who have bad vision?” Enter eyeglasses. Enter resizable fonts. Enter screen readers. Exit bad design. Grandma shouldn’t be on MySpace anyway.
Yes, I love my big font Web 2.0 styles. Yes, I love clean and simple design. Yes, I love standards. But most of all, I love standards and design that evolve to cope with the new generation of their audience and user base. So stop designing for 800 x 600 and start making beautiful websites for those obnoxiously high resolutions of the future.
Now go own the world.-Ravi Vora
Be the first to know how to own the world: Subscribe via e-mail or RSS feed.
:) I agree 100%. When I originally designed my site I made it compatible with 800×600 and felt like I had no space to implement anything and it was all jam packed. I decided to never design for 800×600 again.
It all comes down to knowing your audience. If you’re redesigning the site for the AARP, or some other site for senior citizens, it’s possible they’re running on a second hand machine from their son-in-law or they’ve had no real compelling reason to upgrade in the last 10 years on their fixed social security income and ARE still using those old screens.
But if you’re designing for mainstream business and the like, they’ll be running 1024×768 as a standard resolution.
Again, just know your audience but in general I think it’s well and good to go for 1024 resolutions.
As a designer, I do have to think about the certain 20-30% of my website visitors who still are browsing in the 800 x 600 resolutions. But yes, I have made up my mind that I will be now switching to the 1024 x 768 resolutions and higher.
Yes, some viewers will face difficulties. But, the larger portion of my website visitor will gain. Having a larger access of information in a single screen and easier access of information.
Interesting thoughts, for someone like myself who knows nothing of web design, I still enjoy top quality sites that make your mind say “OOOOOO!”
I build houses as well as web sites
UK building Regulations dictate that ALL new buildings have to be built for wheelchair access to ALL rooms and ALL available facilities….
Surely be making a website inaccessible to partially sited / senior citizens etc is discrimination?
I like design - based layouts as much as the next person, but a good designer should be able to cut a happy medium to avoid turning people away…..
round these parts, Dans statement
“it’s possible they’re running on a second hand machine from their son-in-law or they’ve had no real compelling reason to upgrade in the last 10 years on their fixed social security income and ARE still using those old screens.”
certainly rings true…..
Ben, is that for even residential buildings and such too that needs to have wheelchair access? Wouldn’t that mean any home with a second story would need an elevator or some sort elaborate ramp to get upstairs? That just doesn’t seem feasible…
However any public building, say a court-house, or any other official or government building would need to be accessible…that makes perfect sense. I’m sure we have that regulation here in the States. I beleive it’s the same for our goverment and official websites as well.
But a commercial page or personal page doesnt and shouldn’t have to conform neccesiarily to those standards. It simply isn’t feasible.
For instance…Say I’m desinging a site in full Flash for a high fashion and high profile designer targeted to wealthy teens…it’s safe to sya they’re going to have modern computers…It isn’t practical for my contractor to have me design a full blown alternate XHTML site with similar functionality. That’s more billable ours for me sure, but it’s in excess to what the contractor needs.
Again, if I was designing for the AARP (Association…?? Retired People) it’s imperative of me to have a site that downgrades well.
Great Post thanks for your insightful opinion…