On Sat, 19 Oct 2002 14:53:14 +0200 Alexander Skwar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Kicker does not fit on a 800x600 screen, which is what most Internet > users still use these days." > > Most users still use 800x600? Really? I'd be interested about the > resolution the Cooker folks are using. I'm at 1152x864. And what does > it matter, what resolution "Internet users" use? I mean, Kicker is a > desktop application, not some html stuff. I think the author is bringing forth some sort of notion whereby, if you don't have control over the resolutions users have, you design for a default resolution. This resolution tends to be ultra-mega-defensive; until about 2 years ago most people I worked with in that situation wanted me to design for 640x480! Nowadays I would probably design for 1024x768 (that being the resolution of most reasonably new laptop screens and a tolerable resolution for 15" CRTs), have a legible but sub-optimal fallback to 800x600, and not bother about 640x480. (I run at 1280x1024 on a flat panel). I can't find any particularly modern survey results on all this, but here's one from 18 months ago: http://www.nabe.com/wow/pcc0102.htm And the classic survey which, sadly, appears to no longer be taking place: http://www.cc.gatech.edu/gvu/user_surveys/survey-1998-10/graphs/technology/q128.htm In my experience people don't change resolution because of ignorance or fear of breaking something. I've been asked to troubleshoot all sorts of users and configurations and have found them with a shiny new 19" or 21" monitor running at 800x600 or even standard VGA, showing pixels the size of footballs ... Alastair
