What percent users use 800x600 resolution

theChronic · 09-19-2006, 05:09 PM

Hey folks

I was just wondering what sort of results you guys are having as far as screen resolutions.

My google analytics reports 14.59% users are 800x600

What abouts you?

PS - You can select more than one option so you can account for different sites.

joecacia · 09-19-2006, 06:52 PM

I really don't know, sorry I can't help you with this.

watley · 09-19-2006, 08:09 PM

My stats generally report less than that - somewhere around 7 to 8%.

jasonpoteet · 09-19-2006, 08:19 PM

Depends on the site for me. One of my sites is for a commercial printer and has very few monitors that low, 6.7% to be exact. I consider this site's visitors to be a little more technologically advance than say my ringtone landing pages which have 16.67% 800x600 or my online music subscription pages which have 22.2%. Across the board 1024X728 has 50-60% of my resolution market share.

chicgeek · 09-20-2006, 11:58 AM

3.09%

theChronic · 09-20-2006, 12:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chicgeek

3.09%

*cheers* i like your clients!

one of these days we'll be able to make wider pages..

chicgeek · 09-20-2006, 12:24 PM

I've moved up from the 600x800 standard. Everyone should.

It is time.

WhatcomsFinest · 09-20-2006, 10:06 PM

Hey what program do you guys use do find out these stats? I get the referrer and what not but not the screen resolution

theChronic · 09-20-2006, 10:12 PM

Google analytics

If you aren't someone who is all mad about google having your stats, it is an absolutely amazing tracking program. Lots of dynamics and ability to integrate VERY well with ad campaigns and track conversions and the like.

WhatcomsFinest · 09-20-2006, 10:18 PM

Cool thanks, I signed up for that awhile ago but never finished as I heard people stressing about google and I didn't think I needed it. I think I will check it out now though.

Thanks Again,
Jeremy

DataFeedFile.com · 09-21-2006, 12:01 PM

Not much anymore.

LCDs and monitors are soooo cheap... common.. if they can not afford better resolution than 800x600 there is probably something wrong with them anyways..

Another good point... Yahoo! stuck it out with 800x600 for the longest time on the front page... they just changed!!!! HA!

littleFella · 09-22-2006, 08:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DataFeedFile.com

Not much anymore.

LCDs and monitors are soooo cheap... common.. if they can not afford better resolution than 800x600 there is probably something wrong with them anyways..

Another good point... Yahoo! stuck it out with 800x600 for the longest time on the front page... they just changed!!!! HA!

I do work for various places, one of them is a municipal office. I had them buy 19 inch LCD screens (1280 by 1024), as their old CRTs were ugly, flickering etc.

Guess what! It is a very tough job to convinve a 50+ lady to not use 800 by 600 on a 19" LCD - "because it's easier to see the numbers". Out of about 50 worksations about 30 are set to that res.

**LazyJim** · 09-24-2006, 03:46 AM

in display settings you can change the DPI of the screen so you can have higher resolution without small text!
It's far from perfect though.

hopefully Vista will fix that, if and wehn it is released, if and when it is installed, and if the totally vector GUI isn't pulled out like everything else...

jezza chan · 09-24-2006, 04:25 AM

I use statcounter.com, they provide an excellent analysis of you site, stuff like where visitors come from, what keywords they use and ofcourse what screen setting they use. Most of the visitors that visit my sites use 1280x768 screen resolution.

nedo · 09-24-2006, 04:43 AM

I am hoping microzot to take that resulation off from windows with next os. We are in 2006 and it really smells stupid!

DataFeedFile.com · 09-24-2006, 09:26 AM

littlefella,

You are right about have still yet some percentage using 800x600.

When any read this... please realize you are developing for the future. You are developing your web site most of the time to attract age range 15 - 45. Not 50+.

And I follow the 80/20 rule. In this case 80% is any computer NOT displaying at 800x600 and 20% or less is 800x600, so my opinion therefore support creating at least 1024x768 web sites.

andrew_stephenson · 09-24-2006, 02:26 PM

Hi there,

For Global Stats have a look at this link:

http://www.thecounter.com/stats/

I came across it a while ago and is the most comprehensive set of stats I've found which has been invaluable in planning my website.

According to this site, in August 2006, 16% of web users were using 800x600

Rgrds

Andy

**LazyJim** · 09-25-2006, 02:59 PM

Of course at the end of the day you shouldn't try to restrict your site to one size, try to make it more flexible and fit the user rather than the force the user to make allowances for your inflexible site (those that don't just leave your site).

If you go for 1024, try to avoid making it difficult to use in 800. More often than not I'd choose 800 expected width (minus some for OS and browser interface) and provide something extra for 1024 (e.g. allow the site to expand when the space is available or when the text-size is increased).

I certainly don't recommend discounting 800x600 resolution yet, it is still the last significant low resolution (for desktop computers).

I do recommend however: the Naked-HTML Test (NHT) to alleviate any worry about excluding people: Make sure your site works with JavaScript, CSS and images (and flash and Java and active-x and everything else other than HTML) switched off, (in addition to testing in a text-only browser) to ensure you are not relying on anything other than HTML to make your pages work and are reasonably usable. (If you want to make sure you can also try turning CSS / images / JS on in turn or in all combinations of these being on/off to test these scenarios too!) (I know images are often allowed in even very old HTML, but disabling images will allow to your to test for images not being downloaded/displayed properly (or at all) to some users, or

If you find it hard to make your fully fledged pages work when things like css or images are disabled, (as most people understandably do find it) then consider starting with a bare-bones Naked HTML that works and is as usable as any page/site would have been (way back) when all sites were like that, then progressively enhance the site with all the newer technologies like CSS...

labrocca · 09-25-2006, 08:40 PM

http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp

I can't believe no one linked to this. Very comprehensive.

I also can't believe that FireFox is up to 27% usage...that sucks. FF is terrible imho. Opera baby!