Register

If this is your first visit, please click the Sign Up now button to begin the process of creating your account so you can begin posting on our forums! The Sign Up process will only take up about a minute of two of your time.

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11
  1. #1
    Senior Member mafunk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    115
    Member #
    3277
    What browsers and resolution do you design for? According to a source that I looked at ( ) these are your visitors:http://www.upsdell.com/BrowserNews/stat_trends.htm

    So 94% of the people use IE, according to this. And hardly anyone used Netscape any more. That said, I built a site a few months ago, and there was one thing wrong with it in netscape. The client called and I fixed it. But I cant' stand netscape it's a big pain in the butt - so limiting. Which browsers do you design for?

    Do you design for a particular resolution size or do you design fully liquid sites? Or both? When you design for a particular resolution do you build according the the intended audience or do you always play it safe with 800 x 600?

  2.  

  3. #2
    Senior Member Riat_Sila's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Berkshire, UK
    Posts
    417
    Member #
    3485
    Ideally a site that you design should be x-browser compatible, I mean you don't know who's going to view your website. If a huge client was using Netscape and your site looked, well, screwed they wouldn't exactly stay would they? But if you can't be arsed, IE6 is generally the first priority.

    8x6 is still about the most popular resolution on the web and is what I design for generally (unless specified by the client) and most sites look fine on higher resolutions, if the site is centered.

  4. #3
    Unpaid WDF Intern TheGAME1264's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Not from USA
    Posts
    14,483
    Member #
    425
    Liked
    2783 times
    I generally try to make sure my guys design liquid sites, since you're never quite sure if the person looking at it is going to look at it with a maximized browser window. Also, designing for 800x600 or greater leads to issues with printing a page. This may sound stupid, but I've seen a lot of people (myself among them) who print a lot of web pages out for reference purposes.

    As far as the browser compatibility, I'll generally try to shoot for Netscape 6 or higher/IE 5 or higher. If a site can be done to look good in 4.7, that's just a bonus as far as I'm concerned, given the dying user base for it.
    If I've helped you out in any way, please pay it forward. My wife and I are walking for Autism Speaks. Please donate, and thanks.

    If someone helped you out, be sure to "Like" their post and/or help them in kind. The "Like" link is on the bottom right of each post, beside the "Share" link.

    My stuff (well, some of it): My bowling alley site | Canadian Postal Code Info (beta)

  5. #4
    Senior Member mafunk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    115
    Member #
    3277
    I've talked to a few others about this and they seem to think that it is more important to design xhtml transitional - 800x600 OR liquid. They say if you design in this manner your sites should be compatible with IE, Mozilla & Opera. They say that Netscape is dead, and that Mozilla is the new Netscape. Then there are others who still take netscape into consideration. hmmm. . . . what to do, what to do. . .

  6. #5
    Member GetNewHosting's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Columbia, SC
    Posts
    40
    Member #
    3759
    800x600 IE6/5

    I design for the masses and that's what the masses use.

    If you are on a Mac or using NetScrap well thats your choice to be limited what sites you can go to. Thats the price you pay for being different. And you already know this but choose to keep using them!

    not that I like Micro$oft either but thats the majority..

    just my opinion.
    http://www.GetNewHosting.us/scgi-bin...ers/fed_up.jpg
    or Aol Instant Message (AIM) me at GetNewLIVE with questions!

  7. #6
    Senior Member mafunk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    115
    Member #
    3277
    you sound kind of hostile. . . .

    the point is that I would rather design for netscape, mozillan and opera, but. . .

    Invariably a client will have a couple of people who are looking at their site on netscape, and those couple of people complain. So I think the real solution is to give the client the choice. To explain to them the implications of trying to please the very small minority of netscape users.

  8. #7
    Senior Member mafunk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    115
    Member #
    3277
    oops I mean IE, Mozilla, and Opera

  9. #8
    Senior Member mafunk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    115
    Member #
    3277
    oh - ok you don't sound hostile - i misread

  10. #9
    Senior Member DanielOliver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Cornwall, England.
    Posts
    1,202
    Member #
    1879
    I am running both IE and Mozilla, and don't usually come across any problems at all, my main problem is getting it to display how I want it on bigger resolutions??? :S

  11. #10
    Senior Member mafunk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    115
    Member #
    3277
    You can go liquid. Here's a basic intro to liquid design

    MaFunkhttp://roselli.org/adrian/articles/liquid.asp


Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Remove Ads

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:44 PM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3
Copyright © 2019 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
vBulletin Skin By: PurevB.com