Fixed width vs. Expandable

[Michael]

I recently hired a designer to work up a new layout for the main website that will make it both, hopefully, simpler to use and xHTML compliant (which will make it work on small devices better).

The current site design uses an expanable format, meaning that the site gets wider as the user's browser gets wider.

The designer asked me recently what we thought of potentially using a fixed width design, one that would work on a 800x600 display (which is what the current design was targeted at).

Let me know what you prefer, please, by voting in the poll at the top of this thread.

[MikeUK]

I quite like the look of fixed width it just looks more proffesional to me, e.g. I quite like the look of my brothers website Onyeyiri.co.uk (http://www.onyeyiri.co.uk/)

[Michael]

I agree that it looks better, since you can position stuff where it fits the design best, but I think most people are going to want things sized the way they want it, not the way I want it.

Initial poll results seem to agree.

[DEViANT]

I think if you're going to make it fixed, make it for 1024 width, because that's what most people will use. Fixed width does look nice, but on really big screens (e.g. laptops with WUXGA displays = 1920 width) it would seem like an awful waste of space, so I voted with expandable width.

[MikeUK]

Never thought about that, you make pretty good points.

[Michael]

I think if you're going to make it fixed, make it for 1024 width, because that's what most people will use. Fixed width does look nice, but on really big screens (e.g. laptops with WUXGA displays = 1920 width) it would seem like an awful waste of space, so I voted with expandable width.Except that would make the site non-functional on anything but that large of a browser. If you had a 1024x768 display on your laptop, for example, you would have no choice but to run the browser maximized.

That's not an option.

The width would be 800px.

[Michael]

If you don't understand what we are talking about here, go to PhoneScoop.com (http://www.phonescoop.com/) and look at that site. Maximize your browser. The content is still the same width.

Now do the same with MobileBurn.com. Or even these forums. The site's content gets wider if you make the web browser wider.

That is the difference.

[DaninChina]

I'll chip in with my opinion / suggestions -

I think the expandable size looks nicer and is a better use of on-screen real estate.

However, it's not so important that I'd get particularly worked up if the site was switched to 800 x 600....

Would doing a "mobile" version of the page help anything?
(like here):
http://mobile.theonion.com/

[jc_seremify]

I like this extendable thing as it makes full use of my 1024 x 768 resolution and doesn't need me to scroll too much. I also like the QUICK REPLY at the bottom.

.. but Michael- its your call.

[R@ziel]

i personally like the fixed-width variant more, becauze it allows for a more pleasant design, not regarding increases in width... try looking at www.mobilecentral.dap.ro ...

[Michael]

I like this extendable thing as it makes full use of my 1024 x 768 resolution and doesn't need me to scroll too much. I also like the QUICK REPLY at the bottom.

.. but Michael- its your call.We are not talking about the forums. Just the main site. The forums stay pretty much as-is, except for generic color tratments and such.

[jc_seremify]

Oh (my mistake)- the main site seems fine the way it is. Again I say I prefer it taking up more screen space and not requiring too much scrolling.

[Michael]

Yeah, that seems to be the overriding sentiment.

I told the designer to stick to the fluid format that we currently use.