Upping screen sizes we build to

[leehack]

I know for a fact that if you built a site for 1280 and above and they have a smaller screen. Regardless of what the stats say they will want it to look perfect on there aging computer. LOL

Work with people at the forefront then, not the back of the queue lol. On a serious note, i think during transition, it's something you discuss and offer as an option, not push it so hard, so you're right that does need to be considered.

[Rich Brady]

Work with people at the forefront then, not the back of the queue lol.

LOL You know as well as I do how adamant (for want of a better word ) some clients can be.

[Mike Hughes]

I think, as Rich says, that the decision should primarily be business based. i.e. how much better will the wider layout perform and how much worse will it be for those for smaller screens

I ran the switchover numbers for comparision on different assumptions. So..

If the wider layout loses 20% of business from those with smaller screens:

- a 2% Improvement on large screens => switchover at 91%
- a 5% Improvement on large screens => switchover at 80%
- a 10% Improvement on large screens => switchover at 67%

If the wider layout loses 50% of business from those with smaller screens:

- a 2% Improvement on large screens => switchover at 96%
- a 5% Improvement on large screens => switchover at 91%
- a 10% Improvement on large screens => switchover at 83%

If the wider layout loses 80% of business from those with smaller screens:

- a 2% Improvement on large screens => switchover at 98%
- a 5% Improvement on large screens => switchover at 94%
- a 10% Improvement on large screens => switchover at 89%

the troube is that without testing there's no way of being sure which numbers to use. I guess it has to go with what the client wants, what you can do with the website at the wider width to increase sales, and what your judgement tells you the impact on sales will be.

Mike

[Golf Tee Warehouse]

LOL You know as well as I do how adamant (for want of a better word ) some clients can be.

Not sure, do you mean like these: Adamant Clients

[Rich Brady]

A client/site owner could choose to create a new layout and test it on a selection of their pages and monitor performance.

It may seem like a costly affair, but once the layout has been created they can switch over the rest of the site as and when they feel appropriate.

[Golf Tee Warehouse]

My google analytics stats give results for lots of obscure resolutions, (maybe this is for browsers not maximised) but the breakdown of visitors compared to revenue was:

upto 990 wide - 2.18% Revenue - 2.51% Visitors
1000 -1200 wide - 28.18% Revenue - 29.94% Visitors
1200 - 1399 wide - 45.29% Revenue - 44.79% Visitors
1400+ wide - 24.09% Revenue - 22.46% Visitors

So the customers viewing the site with horizontal scroll bars (ie 800 wide)spent around 13% less than would be expected by the same number of visitors and the bigger the screen the higher the average spend per visitor.

I have no idea what conclusions can be drawn from that info (if any).

[leehack]

I think that shows us that (conservatively) 85% of your revenue comes from people with larger than 1024 screens and thus IMO, you are at the stage where this should seriously be considered.

[Golf Tee Warehouse]

25.8% of that 29.94% 1000-1200 range is 1024 with around 3% on 1152, so only around 75% of the revenue is from 1280+.


If GA reports a resolution of 953 x 714 for a visitor is this a larger screen but with the browser not maximised or some other anomaly.

[leehack]

If GA reports a resolution of 953 x 714 for a visitor is this a larger screen but with the browser not maximised or some other anomaly.

I believe it's not maximised, some people have for instance skype open next to the browser on larger screens.

[leehack]

25.8% of that 29.94% 1000-1200 range is 1024 with around 3% on 1152, so only around 75% of the revenue is from 1280+.

My bad, i read it as 1000-1280 and thus allowed half of that, so you're closing in on the level, but not there yet.

[pinbrook]

you forget peeps (like me!) who when on the res of 1280+ will run with a split screen. I often work with my browser using 2/3 of the screen and skype using 1/3 or sometimes 50/50 2 browsers -this is useful for CMS (half for code half for result) .

i still would come up as a 1280 or 1600 res buyer but in fact i am 1024 or 800

[leehack]

Posts 23 & 24 discussed those exact points, so certainly not forgotten about. Are you saying that if all websites were built to 1280 width, you'd persist with a 1024 wide browser so you can get skype next to it? I'd say it's the other way round, design standards are dictating to you what you can do with the space available.

[pinbrook]

Are you saying that if all websites were built to 1280 width, you'd persist with a 1024 wide browser so you can get skype next to it?

yes i am. I prefer smaller width as it is easier read (think newspaper cols)

but

alot depends on the site - amazon for example is a nightmare on a narrow res

[leehack]

Yeah that's the point though, if a site didn't work on 1024, you'd 1280 it and not bat an eyelid. A site design is dictating to you what you can do, you just work around what you want to do, using the site design and screen size you have to work with. Agree on amazon, although on 3000 wide screen that site still looks busy lol.

[Duncan Rounding]

A wider screen doesn't neccessarily mean a wider browser.

As screens go wider I think more and more people have more than one application open at once and hence don't always use the browser full width. The screen stats around might not take that into consideration when publishing figures.

Interestingly, now that in many cases we have less height than before we are also seeing a trend towards larger headers and so people are becoming more acustomed to scrolling down the page. What was above the fold before may not be anymore.

Most mobile browsers have very good zooming and scrolling facilities now so the need to cater for mobile devices is also changing.

I'll be sticking with my preference of 1000px width designs at least a while yet.