Comments on: Web Page Design Width?

By: Alexander

Alexander — Fri, 21 May 2010 13:06:41 +0000

I think the vast majority of users browse the web with their browser maximised, so wider probably is better.

By: pKeerma

pKeerma — Fri, 07 May 2010 21:21:44 +0000

I don’t know if this thread is dead, but the debate goes on. With the benefit of a full year passed since the first post, I think the argument now favours the “wider is better” camp. High resolution, wide screen monitors are now the rule, not the exception. 800 x 600 sites look dated, waste h-space and require lots of v-scrolling to fit content. I think designing small to accommodate multiple windows on the desktop is giving the user too little credit. If the site is of interest he/she will take the millisecond to expand the browser. 960px is a good compromise – large enough to accommodate content, small enough to fit in an 1024 window (minus chrome).

By: elizabeth

elizabeth — Thu, 06 May 2010 17:48:16 +0000

curious to know about where “the fold” should be estimated though. right now i’m designing for a small monitor – maybe a 13″ macbook, so i have 900px wide – but for my pretty splash/homepage i’m curious to know where to estimate the fold.

anyone know of stats on where mac users keep their dock & icon size? i always keep my dock on the left, but they come shipped w/ the dock at the bottom (and with huge icons)

By: Jarrid1937

Jarrid1937 — Tue, 20 Apr 2010 17:38:15 +0000

I’m with dave too, although he still seems to not be including some factors. 900px is a waste of a lot of useful space you could otherwise have. You can take into consideration items like not having the window completely maximized, having a vertical scrollbar and still add 75 pixels to that number. I just redesigned a website for a client who’s previous designer thought it would be a great idea to have the width at 880px… Not only was that choice quite limiting for things like product listings (only allowed them to list 2 per row), but it still provided a horizontal scrollbar for 800×600 and was not even remotely making use of the extra space for users with 1024×768. My advice, start with the max reasonable width for the resolution 1024×768 (aka 1000px), then test the design is multiple browsers under multiple conditions. You’ll find you may need to scale it back another 30px or so, or perhaps not.

By: Hanson

Hanson — Tue, 13 Apr 2010 16:40:59 +0000

I agree with Dave, it doesn’t matter if we use up all the space, whether negative or positive it can be adjusted later according to our suitability. But lets try to keep our options open up to the space really available.

By: GB

GB — Tue, 30 Mar 2010 22:07:35 +0000

Yes, 960 pixels wide should be the new standard!

Why? Because this fits the width for the native resolution for a large number of existing monitors (17″–19″ LCDs at 1024×768) AND it is exactly half the width of the current crop of large widescreen monitors which typically have a native resolution of 1920×1200 or 1920×1080 (1920 / 2 = 960).

As someone mentioned, just because one has a large monitor, doesn’t mean they maximize their browser window within that monitor.

Since Windows 7 makes docking windows to the left or right side of a display so easy, more and more people will start to do that. The ability to have two browser windows tiled side by side (without horizontal scrollbars) is awesome.

I think designing for a width greater than 960pixels is a big mistake.

By: Umang

Umang — Fri, 12 Feb 2010 15:34:46 +0000

The tip about analytics is good, however i currently believe the bigger is better with web 2.0 designs surfacing more and more!

By: Roger Fong

Roger Fong — Thu, 11 Feb 2010 17:17:43 +0000

The optimal width also depends on the content. A site that uses sidebars and side boxes would require and accommodate greater width. A simple site would look better with a compact width. The branch library in my neighborhood has computer screens with maximum widths of only 800 dpi. You can’t imagine how frustrating it is to have to scroll left-right.

By: Phatman

Phatman — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 15:58:01 +0000

Just because you have a 2000 dpi + monitor doesn’t mean you have to use the whole width! many people have large resolution monitors to open lots of panes for applications like Flash or multiple applications open. But I think 960 is pretty much standard at the moment, god knows how people cope on those tiny Internet cafe laptops lol.

By: myadds

myadds — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 12:36:23 +0000

i was using 900 but out our boss got new monitor has 2048 px. and he is telling everyday adjust our website width, so we are confused bcoz we can not make witdh to 1800-2000