GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum

GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum (https://gfy.com/index.php)
-   Fucking Around & Business Discussion (https://gfy.com/forumdisplay.php?f=26)
-   -   web designers: different designs for 1024x780 and 800x600 (https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=559594)

Zester 01-03-2006 05:52 AM

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?

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.. :winkwink:


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

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 :2 cents:

alan-l 01-04-2006 01:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ace_luffy
800-600 is a standard.....

:1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh
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!!!


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:43 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©2000-, AI Media Network Inc123