[thelist] Website Width i.e. 760px vs 960px

Christian Heilmann codepo8 at gmail.com
Tue Jun 13 02:08:47 CDT 2006


> 960px came about from a need to have a wider site than 760px. And 200px was
> what we needed and generally works well for some of our sites. We have not
> had the need to build anywhere near to 1024. So we have built sites with a
> 760px main area and the extra 200px is used for additional web uses.
>
> >> why not make it fluid?
>
> I am aware of the fixed vs fluid debates and I just prefer "fixed" which
> suits what we do. Just a different apporach. If a client wanted a fluid
> design or there was a need for it then I would happily do it that way.

Call me a dreamer but so far every time I made sure my client's
visitors were happy the client was happy. Every time I did exactly
what the client told me to do I had a one-off contract, invoiced and
never saw them again just to see the web site being redesigned a year
later with the flexibility I told them would be a good idea.

Again: Check _the stats of this site_ and then make your choice.
Anything we could contribute here with _our_ stats of even _general
stats like counter.com_ means absolutely nothing for your audience.

http://www.meyerweb.com/eric/thoughts/2004/12/20/market-share-dont-care/



More information about the thelist mailing list