Posted by JDS on 08/24/05 23:13

On Wed, 24 Aug 2005 18:57:11 +0100, Mimic wrote:

>> Annoying part of layout is that it's designed 1024x768 minimum
>> resolution. I basically never have that big browser window even of my
>> screen is bigger than that. They could easily have made main column
>> fluid and that layout would have worked on 800x600 resolution too.
>>
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>
>>
> I noticed the res thing too. Im sure they have their reasons. In defence,
> the core user base is PC/laptop based web/gfx designers, and as such tend
> to run in higher res's. It would be interesting to know how many people
> outside of corporate lockdown terminals actually still run in 800*600.
>
> --
> Mimic

Missing the point, I think. The size of the viewport/browser window and
NOT the size of the screen is what matters. for example, I currently run
my desktop at 1600x1200 but my browser windows are *rarely* as wide as
1024. So that means I have to resize my browser for the stupid new ALA
site.

Am I alone in this matter?

--
JDS | jeffrey@example.invalid
| http://www.newtnotes.com
DJMBS | http://newtnotes.com/doctor-jeff-master-brainsurgeon/

[Back to original message]