Minimum screen resolution for 2.2

[Baxter_jb]

link to browser statistics:

http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp

2006 Higher 1024x768 800x600 640x480 Unknown
July 19% 58% 17% 0% 6%
January 17% 57% 20% 0% 6%

roughly 2 out of 10 visitors use 800 x 600 but that is dropping by about 10% a year.

[grumps]

I'll take a guess and say that on average around 20% of people browse at 800x600 - anyone got any solid info on current trends?

General stats are just that, general stats. What might be typical in one niche, or one type of business may not be the same for others. Typically, for example, gamers will have all the latest and greatest, but then you might have accounting firms with intranet message boards and some of those guys might still be using 15" crt's. Demographics and business types certainly play a key. For our own stats, 26% still use 800x600 resolution. 1024x768 is the biggest percentage at 53%. And when you factor in traffic averaging in excess of 10,000 visitors per day, that's 2,600 customers daily. (Note, these figures do not include those of my board, but rather of our company site). But still, we considered moving to 1024x768, but felt that 2500+ customers/potential customers per day was significant enough to continue accommodating.

Check out

my December desktop screenshot. ;-)

Hehe, I use a 21" widescreen for work and you can't usually see my desktop at all as i have my most common windows fitted perfectly across the screen, with the most common ones larger sized and centered while the lesser used ones are fitted inside windows on the remaining space. But I see you basically do the same thing, except include a little extra scenery :)

[Cybertimber2009]

IPS isn't the first to design around a 1024x786 resolution. And I believe most agree the ONLY outstanding issue is with the ACP.

How can I prove this? I use IP.B on my PDA, Default skin. It just wraps everything to the 320x240 resolution. (or 240x320 when I flip to landscape). I haven't tried 2.2, but I don't think they would be that its that diffrent.

When I shrink my window though, the only issues I see are the footer which is due to the two dropdowns, and a viewing issue with the navigation in the header which is to be expected.

IN CONCLUSION: The 'Average User' as well as a non-admin 'Advanced User' will NOT see any issues with viewing the board at a 800x600 viewing size.
But I'll have to check that with my other computer tomorrow which I can change to 800x600. My laptop doesn't like 800x600.

[Justin]

And tis why you can skin IPB to your heart's content. :)

...which includes the AdminCP... simply removing or changing that logo image should solve your problems when using that small of a resolution... (as stated earlier)

[TestingSomething]

I reduced my resolution to 800x600 and clicked around a bit. Amazing how different everything is and how much you miss. Like on Yahoo.com the whole left hand bar just vanishes.

Yeah when I change mine to high resolutions just to see how things look, many sites look totally different. In my host's support ticket setup, in IE6 I had to use the tab button to submit the form in 800 by 600 res because it wouldnt scroll down to the submit button. lol

[TestingSomething]

Not at all, IPS is a company, if they want to maximise sales, they will want to maximise their customer base, and by setting this resolution limit they are limiting sales not maximising them.

I have a few IPB licences, but I'll need to do more reading on this subject before I think about upgrading to 2.2.

If there is any chance that as a board Admin I'm going to get hit by support requests from 800x600 users then it's a no go for me. I can do without that hastle.

So far no-one has posted actual web stats for screen resolutions, I used to have a link to such info but cannot locate it now. I'll take a guess and say that on average around 20% of people browse at 800x600 - anyone got any solid info on current trends?

ANy 800 by 600 ones will probably eventually report things to you. The profile page was totally messed up with the things on the right until Matt changed widths, and so now the center part doesnt look right. Obviously nothing else he could do about that though, becuase it is a space issue. I want to reskin it though. Although I havent felt like trying lately.

But anyway the only thing in 2.2 which would really be worse for 800 by 600 people is the profile page. Or you could use the old style of profile.

[sunrisecc]

...which includes the AdminCP... simply removing or changing that logo image should solve your problems when using that small of a resolution... (as stated earlier)

Easier said than done.
I cropped the extra logo and posted on Beyond requesting how to just change just the ACP. There are no responses.
I prefer Rikki's method.

[Justin]

Just create a 1px transparent .gif to replace /skin_acp/IPB2_Standard/images/acp-logo.gif .... why is that hard?

[sunrisecc]

Because that action alone is insufficient to alter the ACP headers.

Please see
http://www.ipsbeyond.com/forums/index.php?...ic=16963&hl= .

[Justin]

You might try hitting F5 (if you use FireFox) to force the browser to refresh the data?

[sunrisecc]

As I reported on the Beyond topic, that recommendation does not help the ACP.

[sunrisecc]

Refresh did not help in FF2.0 or IE7. However clearing the browser's cache did.

[whitetigergrowl]

I've looked at the stats for my site and it looks like less than 10% of the people that use it use 800x600 or less. I prefer making the majority happy rather than the minority. You can't please everyone and if some people can't or don't want to go higher than 800x600 then there is nothing I can do to help them since its going the way of the dinosaurs. Technology and websites like everything else, should not need to wait for those that can't or don't like change. By going this route it also sets IPB above many other forums. It looks cleaner and less amateurish and looks much nicer and sharper.

[Cybertimber2009]

You might try hitting F5 (if you use FireFox) to force the browser to refresh the data?

ctrl+F5 is the forced cache refresh :thumbsup:

[Justin]

ctrl

+F5 is the forced cache refresh :thumbsup:

Indeed, I goofed up there. :P

However, a simple F5 (or ctrl+R) refresh worked flawlessly for me when I tested overwriting the image. :D

[VelvetElvis]

The trend towards larger resolutions is a temporary thing anyway. The desktop PC is an endangered species. As the price of high density flash drives comes down, handhelds are going become the most common computing device, replacing laptops just as laptops are now replacing desktops. Handhelds are the growth platform right now. As they replace laptaps, the average screen size will drop and keep dropping. Hopefully thought will be put into the default layout of 3.0.

[stobbo]

Even though Handheld PC's are increasing in user amount, I wouldn't say the PC/Laptop is a endangered species. Handheld PC's are not going to replace the PC/Laptop, you can't exactly use them for stuff like Adobe Photoshop.

Although I do agree about the need for a smaller resolution skin. Maybe IP.Board could come pre loaded with a 1024x768 skin, and a 320x240 skin.

[.Sephiroth.]

Well, to be quite honest, I'm using a 1600x1200 screen resolution. I don't have everything maximised, for I like to see my desktop wallpaper as well. ;) But I can say, I still have a computer in this house that still runs 800x600, and there's no chance of changing that unless we get a new PC to replace that old one.

800x600 is also pretty common at the school here in town as well. I dunno why, but 95% of the computers still run Windows 98. Trends do change, but as for 800x600 support, I would definitely like to see this happen. Sure, we have javascript to resize large images that were posted. Why not use javascript to hide certain elements for the 800x600 screen resolution?

[rbalch]

Wow, don't people realize that the 800x600 users are not generally 'just some of our neighbors with vision problems or old monitors'? :blink:

Others, as well as myself, observe that a lot of times 800x600 users are people with:
1. yeah, older and less-capable hardware yet
2. relatively new software ( even often the most modern browsers :thumbsup: ) but
3. IMPT: happen to be living in the poorer, 'developing' countries.

I believe in being fair to as many people as possible as a website designer and publisher. It's nonsense that 800x600 support means fancy features can't be provided to the high-rez users (even if 800x600 users end up losing some bells and whistles for whatever reason, that's fine, just keep out that dang horizontal scrollbar (w00t) ).

BTW, I'm not talking about 640x480 or lesser here at all... I find it tough to make much of a good looking web app for 640x480, at least while targeting PC-based users.
Also BTW, I see designing good experiences for users of the newest, ultra-mobile, net-enabled devices as pretty much a whole different issue than this, but that's just IMO.

//////
Back to the main point though:
To raise our minimum expectation to above 800x600 is to disproportionately affect our international audience. Yes, the Internet is something great for the citizens of more developed countries plus it is still evolving while changing our lives dramatically, etc.... but, many argue its impact is greater for those who are just now discovering the 'net (i.e. the individuals currently having their first web-surfing experiences ever just because of economic reasons - since they are living in more remote parts of the world :ph34r: )
//////

I've always encouraged workarounds and layout changes when 800x600 can be detected, etc.

Why?
For that reason just stated: grow and support your international audience! All studies show the net's newest connectees are overwhelmingly living outside the G7. (Oh, whoops!, isn't it the G8 now <_< ) Upping the standard is screwing over the foreign visitors more than 'us' (and those from our neighborhoods). Since word of mouth is such a phenomenal marketing tool in many cultures of developing countries (I'd argue it's even more effective in those communities than in the USA/EU/AU), the reality is that sometimes having the website that cares enough to look good in 800x600 can mean the difference between planting the seed and growing a huge loyal following in __________ country or, instead, having them end up embracing your competitor. >_<

Note: If your website is not targeted towards or even useful for such people described above, then this argument does not apply much and I reckon you should just get back to figuring out how much effort you want to put in towards supporting the coming wave of fancy new mobile net devices (but also maybe consider the old CRTs your neighbors with as well as without vision problems might still be running :thumbsup: )

Best Regards,
rbalch