Paul M - That's quite a strong response. Do you have a resolution greater than/equal to 1920x1200? If so, you probably shouldn't be maximizing your browser, and therefore I'm not sure where you're getting the "half a screen-width wasted" estimate from.
I'm on the largest fixed width style here (950?), and there is currently only 60px on each side of the main body. I'm on a 1920x1200 screen. No wasted space here.
-----
Anyway, readability turns to CRAP on fluid widths; they are the bane of my existence. I got into this entirely too long drawn out argument with a friend (who has a 30" 2560x1600 screen), and he actually believes fluid width on a forum is a good thing. When sitting at his desk you actually have to pan your head back and forth to read anything. I seriously think he's either really stupid or completely delusional.
I can't believe so many have voted for fluid, either. Quite disappointing actually. Fluid introduces soooo many damn complications that can be removed completely if you just design around a decent fixed width. A wide fixed width at that. I don't care about users who still use 800x600 monitors either. I have people screaming at me over at vB.com that 20-30% of the internet still uses 800x600 and that gave me a really good laugh.
But if you really want to get technical, the best design possible is a fluid width with min and max widths set on the body.
12-10-2007, 04:11 PM
Threaded Mode