The company I work for currently supports a minimum of 1024×768 screen resolution with one optional tool bar installed in the browser. This is based on user statistics. We’re in the process of pulling updated user information and the w3schools show that 81.5% of all users now have a higher browser resolution that 1024×768 (Jan 2011 study).
The old standards when it comes to screen resolutions are very fragmented (not including mobile devices). The rule of thumb has been in the past that 20% and higher was considered statistically significant in business. It appears that this is no longer the case.
We do allow our web-based applications to expand for high-resolutions in areas where expansion adds to the user experience.
Looking at the report above it appears that you can use the 20% rule due to fragmentation and may instead need to look at width and height as separate considerations.
Looking at the information it appears that the best solution would be to look at a minimum supported standard of 1280×768 in order to get to the 20%+ even though it’s not a true monitor resolution size.
I’m curious as the sizes of monitors change what everyone thinks the new standards will be?
We use resizing element or fit element base on this issue you mention, so for most of us dev` its not an issue but more work on code extending.
I think what you want to do is google “responsive webdesign” or “responsive web development” and you should be heading the right way
I’m familiar with Responsive Design on the positive and negative side of the equation from a designer and a business point of view. Thank you for sharing that. I was able to go in and look at some of the newer concepts and ability as CSS , HTML and other technologies advance.
I think that it has pluses and negatives. While the concept of code once, present many is a very popular concept and makes complete sense for resale of templates it doesn’t always lend itself to the best user experience and can often cause some users agony.
On the positive side it offers a great deal of flexibility. I’d almost split it down the middle with pluses are on the development side and negatives on the user experience side.
I think that Responsive Design forgets or doesn’t always look at the full picture including bandwidth, pull on the DOM , browser memory. I believe all those factors have to be included in a true evaluation of the processes used when creating an online asset.
If the site is personal, brochure and less about tasks its an incredible way to go and I actually use it myself to some limited degree. I think it suffers when you have content heavy sites as people are task oriented and need clear interaction and ways to find and complete their tasks.