Website Update

[DiamondSCattleCo]

What do you mean "recommended"? Nothing is actually "recommended" by any official organization for web site design. If there is any single expert on usability, it would be Nielsen and even he says design for 1024x768 (Link). If anything is recommended (which it's not), it would be a fluid layout like this page.

Recommended, as in industry leaders recommend it.

Every 2 years I attend user interface seminars put on Microsoft and Xerox in which a copy of their new user interface standards document is issued. In the last 4 years, there have been extensive sections on web site design, primarily due to the proliferation of .NET applications over the internet. So while small web design companies may not follow a particular standard, I can assure you that large companies adhere to a set of standards that have been entrenched in the business atmosphere since before Windows was even created.

As far as Neilson's recommendation, I'd question his abilities as an analyst if 1) he is not aware of these user interface standards documents that have been around since the early 1980s and 2) he feels its ok to tick off 25% of your intended audience (again based on both Microsoft and Xerox statistics, two companies that have taken interface design to an artform).

Anyway, I'll say no more on the topic since it appears as though we've hi-jacked the thread. Suffice to say, I think the web page looks pretty good.

Rod

 

[Third Row]

This entire thing is splitting hairs (designing for just one resolution is short sighted any way) but it really irks me when people make blatantly false claims like you did in your first post.

To cut to the chase…

1 - If you don’t know who Nielsen is, you have no credibility regarding this subject. The guy literally wrote the book on web usability. I find it extremely hard to believe that anybody who is knowledgeable of web usability would point to Microsoft and Xerox conferences while dismissing Nielsen.

2 - Your claim that people who don’t follow an 800x600 standard are “small web design companies” is one of the most ignorant statements I have seen lately. Do you expect anybody to take you seriously if you are going to write off Ebay, Yahoo, Amazon, CNN, and Youtube as small?

However, the most telling thing of all is that one of the companies you claim say 800x600 is the standard, Microsoft.com, is…..you guessed it…….1024x768.

3 - Your statistical claims are just flat out wrong, there’s no other way to put it. Your 25% number is higher than any legitimate analytics report has claimed since 2005 and you still haven’t provided a link for it.

You do sound like what you claim you are; somebody who attended a few technical conferences with a small section on web design.

 

[DiamondSCattleCo]

[editted for content by myself]

I was going to get into a peeing contest with you, but decided to edit it out. I have my sources and experience, you have yours and ne'er the twain shall meet apparently.

Good luck with your little web site company. I'm sure you'll do fine.

Rod

 

[Third Row]

Peeing contest? Seriously, grow up.

I challenged your false claims and you continued to defend them with more false claims that you have failed to back up. Even the website of the company you claim sets the standards you are referring to contradicts what you said.

I can assure you that large companies adhere to a set of standards that have been entrenched in the business atmosphere since before Windows was even created.

It might surprise you but technology has advanced quite a bit since Windows was created. Microsoft.com is 1024x768, I would duck out of the conversation too if I were you.

 

[certherfbeef]

Very interesting discussion going on here.

 

[gberry]

Yeah, and I don't understand one bit of it.

 

[Third Row]

In layman's terms, almost everyone used to have small computer screens (800x600). That meant that it was best to design for small computer screens so that those people would not have to scroll across the screen to see your entire site.

Over time, people have upgraded their computer monitors and the small screens became the minority in late 2001. As of the most recent statistical reports, fewer than 16% of people are on the small, 800x600 computer screen. This means you can add more content to your pages with wider websites without making people scroll horizontally.

Many of the largest sites on the Internet such as Yahoo, Microsoft, Amazon, CNN, and Ebay have already switched to the wider layouts. A large portion of industry experts on web usability, including the man that's written most of the best selling books on the subject, have changed their opinion and now say designing wider websites or dynamic width websites is the best idea.

Bottom line, if you are having a website designed and your designer tells you that 800x600 is "the standard", don't listen to them.




Regarding the thread...

The discussion/argument has been a systems analyst who attended a few conferences with old information on web design (DiamondSCattleCo) trying to tell somebody who makes their living on websites that the old standard is somehow "the" standard. He's doing it without providing any sources, is just making stuff up, and he is contradicted by those he claims sets the standard.