Screen resolutions - is 800x600 dead?

Screen resolutions - is 800x600 dead?

Summary: Is 1024x768 the new 800x600?

SHARE:
TOPICS: Browser
16

Time for a quick poll ...

Almost all the web data I have access to (both for my own sites and others) seems to indicate that the 800x600 screen resolution is dead and that 1024x768 is the new 800x600.  However, when I talk to web developers they continue to preach to me of the importance of designing sites so that they fit into 800x600.  The argument is that while screen resolutions might have increased, people don't surf the web with their browsers maximized.  Makes sense ...

Anyway, I'm interested in screen resolutions ... let me know what you are using.  I'm running a dual-monitor setup with both at 1200x1024.  I did experiment with going to 1600x1200 but I found the lower resolution more comfortable.

[poll id=160]

Topic: Browser

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

16 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • I needed to vote more than once

    But here is my setup
    1024x768 x 5
    800x600 x 1
    1280x1024 x 2
    1440x900 x 1

    Most websites are becoming difficult to view with 1024x768
    nucrash
    • me too...

      1440x900 x 1 (@work)
      1280x1024 x 2 (home desktops)
      1680x1050 x 1 (notebook)
      DreamDevil
  • The reason people stick with lower resolutions

    is because the OS people don't get it right. People equate higher resolutions with smaller fonts (icons, etc.) in exchange for more real estate, and smaller fonts are hard to read. If the window manager people would get it right and increase font/icon/etc. size as the resolution gets higher more people would swing to the higher resolutions. Then make a tool to make it easy to shrink them for those who want more real estate on their screens. (For the record, I am one who would prefer more real estate, but I would be willing to take the extra step to get what I want knowing most people want their screens to be more readable.)
    Michael Kelly
    • The ability to adjust font size independent ....

      ... of screen size is a feature of Windows. Come on back from the dark side Michail. :)
      ShadeTree
      • Not just fonts...

        People basically want EVERYTHING to be bigger, and they don't want to think too much about making it bigger. Changing the screen resolution accomplishes that.

        In fact, I think it is the only way to accomplish it on Windows. Anything else would fail down on fixed sized images and dialogs. But maybe there is a way. I'm not a Windows expert.

        Anyway, my votes:
        1280x1024 x 2 (docked work laptop and home PC)
        1280x800 x 1 (work laptop undocked)
        1024x768 x 1 (home laptop)
        Erik Engbrecht
        • I agree, many people can't read small fonts

          I have co-workers who use 800x600 and manually adjust the resolution up for programs that demand higher resolutions. Once they are finished with those programs they reduce the resolution back to 800x600.

          Don't touch the DPI settings in Windows. Leave that at the "Normal size (96 DPI)" or risk breaking applications.

          I had a doctors office call me complaining that their medical software wouldn't display all the text. The text would just run off the side of the program window without any scroll bars. Changing resolutions didn't help at all. Discovered that an employee had changed the DPI settings. Changed it back to the default 96 DPI and "bingo!" everything worked exactly like it was supposed too.
          dragosani
  • Yes

    My website (4500 unique visits/month):
    60% - 1024x768
    0% - 800x600
    15% - wide screen (increasing)
    Pablo Pizarro
  • It's been dead for ages

    I haven't been worried about programming for such low resolutions for over a year now - perhaps even two.

    So, yes, it's long dead.
    elinorH
  • It lives on

    Actually, I knew a guy at QVC (yes, the TV shopping network... I interned there as a software developer. side note: they are very technically advanced, more so than you may initially think!). Anyway, this guy rocked 800x600 like it was going out of style. This was 2001. It probably is dead though, except for terminals or server rooms.
    Voodoo187
  • LCD's have a hand in this.

    I have recently changed from a 19"CRT @ 1024x768 to a 17" LCD @ 1280x1024. The change in resolution was required as the LCD monitor produced a sharper clearer image on the higher res, and the monitor itself strongly sugested the higher res for best picture quality. I would probably prefer to run 1024x768 but after trying various res's 1280x1024 was the clear (excuse pun) winner for the LCD.(Philips 170S5)
    Craigus
    • CRTs are higher than LCDs

      Granted, I ran my 17" CRT at 1280x1024 and my 17" LCD at 1280x1024 but the 17" CRT actually had 15.7 Inches of viewable area, whereas the LCD had 17" of viewable area.
      nucrash
  • Not dead in the classroom

    In classrooms, there are two reasons for using 800x600. First, projectors are more expensive than computers, so many classtrooms in otherwise well-equipped schools still have not been able to replace older 800x600 max projectors with newer ones with higher resolution. The second reason, however, seems more common: some software (e.g., Excel, web browsers) has default fonts which look great on your screen but are too small to see on a projector from the back of the room. Using Excel for an example (which I do have to use occasionally in class), either I have to reset all my defaults to make a simple spreadsheet readable or just crank down to 8x6 and things are OK. Same thing for putting up web pages. Some pages are made with CSS controls so you can adjust font size easily, but most are not and it's just easier to change the resolution for the screen.
    cd2_z
    • good point about classrooms

      This is a great point about the projectors. They keep getting cheaper but when you have many to replace it's a huge expense. And unless you have a very large screen to use, it does become much more difficult to read it in the back of the room.

      I used to work for an adult education college, and at one point we tried to switch our computer labs to 1024x768 up from 800x600 (a few years ago) and we got too many complaints because a lot of the older users were having trouble reading everything. We had 17" monitors there but I can't remember if we had the CRTs or LCDs at the time. I'm not sure if it's been changed since then though.
      mdak06
  • 1600x1200

    I use 1600x1200 on my home and work computers, but I use Linux on both so I can adjust the fonts (and some other UI elements) to a comfortable size without worrying about applications freaking out.
    chemist109
  • My main computer

    Is 1280x1024 because I have an old Hitachi 24" CRT. 1024x768 is too large for such a large screen. But the rest of my family uses 1027x768.
    Species8472
  • re: 800x600

    With the pending advent of the ASUS EEE 701 you may see a resurgence of interest in 800x600, since the ASUS 701 7" display is likely 800x480.
    rregier@...