New website design

[wayneL]

Firstly, to "optimise" is fine. Making it lousy for anything less is not optimising and (as shown by other sites) it's not necessary.

Secondly, you're totally missing the point with those stats. I run a screen resolution higher than 1024x768 too. But I have a number of other windows open for other applications and never run my browser in full-screen mode. It's called multi-tasking. I've seen polls suggesting that about 50% of users run their browsers full-screen. For the other 50%, the screen resolution is totally irrelevant except as an upper limit.

Do you have stats on what size people's browser window is? Even then, that would be misleading, as users will be making their browser window bigger on this site precisely because it works so poorly otherwise.

Not too many of the major sites that I visit, including MSM sites have a fluid width setup, most are fixed width.

Personally, I hate fluid width as the reading area becomes too wide, making it difficult to concentrate. This is the reason print media uses columns, it increases readership. Fluid width would compromise those who use the full screen for their browser.

IMO

 

[It's Snake Pliskin]

Not too many of the major sites that I visit, including MSM sites have a fluid width setup, most are fixed width.

Personally, I hate fluid width as the reading area becomes too wide, making it difficult to concentrate. This is the reason print media uses columns, it increases readership. Fluid width would compromise those who use the full screen for their browser.

IMO

Fixed width is best. There is nothing more annoying than a site which has the width of a football field.

Good work Joe. I wish you all the best.
Cheers.

 

[prs]

Hi Joe Blow
I haven't had much input of late probably due to work and also the slump in share prices. I like the changes very much, well done.

 

[Kremmen]

There is nothing more annoying than a site which has the width of a football field.

Then don't use your browser full-screen! Set it to the size you like to view ... and properly designed web sites will fit that.

 

[wayneL]

Then don't use your browser full-screen! Set it to the size you like to view ... and properly designed web sites will fit that.

So a fixed width website isn't properly designed?

Better tell all the big mainstream media companies then.

 

[Happy]

Then don't use your browser full-screen! Set it to the size you like to view ... and properly designed web sites will fit that.

Being rather computer challenged, I would not have idea how to do that?

I use IE

 

[Trembling Hand]

Very nice Joe. All is well in my world again.

 

[sam76]

Just a heads up there, Joe.

Some partner links don't work.

I've been trying to check out the beefed up Toureg for the last couple of days but been unable to open the link.

Cheers

 

[Joe Blow]

Just a heads up there, Joe.

Some partner links don't work.

I've been trying to check out the beefed up Toureg for the last couple of days but been unable to open the link.

Hi Sam,

That link should work. I don't actually determine where that one goes, someone else does that. Try it again, perhaps on a different PC, and if it still doesn't work let me know.

 

[Joe Blow]

Very nice Joe. All is well in my world again.

Yes, I think the 700 pixel thumbnails are working nicely.

 

[Kremmen]

So a fixed width website isn't properly designed?

Better tell all the big mainstream media companies then.

No, a fixed width web site whose main content is text in a single area isn't properly designed.

Big newspapers are trying to create a look online that's similar to their printed form. That means columns. The easy way for them to get items to keep in proportion is to use a fixed size, because they are trying to balance photos with text. If you use a small browser window, they are a pain to navigate because you're scrolling both ways all the time. If you use a really big window, there's tons of white space all around the outside and it looks bloody silly. Yes, they've sacrificed usability for appearance.

A bulletin board site which doesn't have multiple columns of data has absolutely no need to even consider that compromise. (aka mistake #9) As I said, look at Flyertalk. Same software as this. Lovely and usable at any resolution.

 

[wabbit]

If you use a non-IE browser, you can over-ride the applied styles to set whatever width you like; either globally, or for particular sites.

For example, I view ASF at 100% of my screen width on my 1024x768 monitor... no wasted white space for me!

wabbit

 

[jtb]

Yes, I think the 700 pixel thumbnails are working nicely.

Yeah.

Didn't realise how much I preferred the old way until logging on tonight.

OK....................... change is bad and I'm a Luddite.

Anychance we can get the Southern Cross up in the header too Joe?

Still looks a bit UJ/English imo