web designers: different designs for 1024x780 and 800x600 - GoFuckYourself.com

Zester · 01-03-2006, 05:52 AM

sometimes you can design pages for both 1024 and 800 - I'm not saying you can't.
but most of the times you are designing the page to display better at either of the resolutions - mostly 800x600 (being 1027x780 compatible but not as good).
would it be totally crazy/dumb to determine the screen resolution of the user in a JavaScript and then specify a different external .CSS in each case?

Theo The Theologian · 01-03-2006, 06:01 AM

Praise you Brother Jestor with a Z. Not dumb at all in fact alot of people do it this way.

On a sidenote has anyone seen my pants?

ssp · 01-03-2006, 06:09 AM

Wouldn't be crazy but it mind you that it is:

a.) a shitload of work
b.) javascript won't work 100% of the time

ChewbaCreative · 01-03-2006, 06:29 AM

that's real - just make a fullscreen sites ;)

Zester · 01-03-2006, 06:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ssp

Wouldn't be crazy but it mind you that it is:

a.) a shitload of work
b.) javascript won't work 100% of the time

a.) why? because of editing 2 .CSS files? there is a solution for this using the ClassName object to only dynamicaly change a few elements and not the whole .CSS file - so you don't need 2 .CSS files.
b.) you set a default which is the common resulotion (I think 1027) - very easy

ssp · 01-03-2006, 06:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zester

a.) why? because of editing 2 .CSS files? there is a solution for this using the ClassName object to only dynamicaly change a few elements and not the whole .CSS file - so you don't need 2 .CSS files.
b.) you set a default which is the common resulotion (I think 1027) - very easy

Depends if you have images on your site or not. This idea might work for a simple textlink TGP but once you work with objects that are absolute in size, such as images or form elements, you're already getting yourself into trouble.

Goodluck anyways.

(Don't take my word for the javascript comment, find out for yourself.)

JamesK2 · 01-03-2006, 07:00 AM

Unless you're getting paid a shitload for a project it's too much work.

I prefer to just design in either a fixed width of 800, or a percentage width. Both work fine and I don't hear anyone complain about a design being too small.

Ace_luffy · 01-03-2006, 08:25 AM

800-600 is a standard.....

daxmonster · 01-03-2006, 10:00 AM

I second that..800 works..no problem at all...

chupachups · 01-03-2006, 10:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChewbaCreative

that's real - just make a fullscreen sites ;)

Yeah, thats just lovely when you are on 1600x1200 resolution..

Z - I have done it, and in fact with 3 different resolutions - works very well.

Zester · 01-04-2006, 01:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ace_luffy

800-600 is a standard.....

check your traffic stats - 800 is not standard anymore (it used to be)

Zester · 01-04-2006, 01:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JamesK

Unless you're getting paid a shitload for a project it's too much work.

I prefer to just design in either a fixed width of 800, or a percentage width. Both work fine and I don't hear anyone complain about a design being too small.

I also use percentage width, but sometimes it just won't cut it

alan-l · 01-04-2006, 01:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ace_luffy

800-600 is a standard.....

Do you use Mosaic browser as well?

Tempest · 01-04-2006, 02:04 AM

My good lord.. No wonder so many idiots fail in this business...
K.I.S.S. people.. We're here to make MONEY not art!!!

01-03-2006, 05:52 AM	#1
Zester Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 5,344	web designers: different designs for 1024x780 and 800x600 sometimes you can design pages for both 1024 and 800 - I'm not saying you can't. but most of the times you are designing the page to display better at either of the resolutions - mostly 800x600 (being 1027x780 compatible but not as good). would it be totally crazy/dumb to determine the screen resolution of the user in a JavaScript and then specify a different external .CSS in each case? __________________ * Mainstream ? $65 per sale * new male contraception

01-03-2006, 06:01 AM	#2
Theo The Theologian Confirmed User Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 1,099	Praise you Brother Jestor with a Z. Not dumb at all in fact alot of people do it this way. On a sidenote has anyone seen my pants? __________________ I'm a hate-fuelled umbrella-wielding photographer with a winning smile, and a way with the ladies.

01-03-2006, 06:29 AM	#4
ChewbaCreative Confirmed User Join Date: Dec 2003 Posts: 1,118	that's real - just make a fullscreen sites ;) __________________ high design. high creative. adultcreative

01-03-2006, 07:00 AM	#7
JamesK2 Confirmed User Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 6,589	Unless you're getting paid a shitload for a project it's too much work. I prefer to just design in either a fixed width of 800, or a percentage width. Both work fine and I don't hear anyone complain about a design being too small. __________________

01-03-2006, 08:25 AM	#8
Ace_luffy www.creationcrew.com Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: CREATIONCREW.COM CREATIONCREW.COM CREATIONCREW.COM CREATIONCREW.COM CREATIONCREW.COM CREATIONCREW.COM Posts: 12,110	800-600 is a standard..... __________________ ++ Adult and Mainstream Websites Designs \| 10 banners for only $50 \| html5 Banners ++ email : [email protected] Telegram : https://t.me/creationcrew \| HTML5/Responsive Site - Div/CSS - ElevatedX - NATs - Wordpress

01-03-2006, 06:09 AM	#3
ssp Confirmed User Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: United Kingdom Posts: 7,990	Wouldn't be crazy but it mind you that it is: a.) a shitload of work b.) javascript won't work 100% of the time

01-03-2006, 10:00 AM	#9
daxmonster Confirmed User Join Date: Oct 2003 Posts: 108	I second that..800 works..no problem at all... __________________

01-04-2006, 02:04 AM	#14
Tempest Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: May 2004 Location: West Coast, Canada. Posts: 10,217	My good lord.. No wonder so many idiots fail in this business... K.I.S.S. people.. We're here to make MONEY not art!!!