Web Development
 
Forums: » Register « |  User CP |  Games |  Calendar |  Members |  FAQs |  Sitemap |  Support | 
 
User Name:
Password:
Remember me
 



Go Back   Dev Articles Community ForumsWeb DesignWeb Development

Reply
Add This Thread To:
  Del.icio.us   Digg   Google   Spurl   Blink   Furl   Simpy   Y! MyWeb 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Unread Dev Articles Community Forums Sponsor:
  #1  
Old May 17th, 2003, 07:06 PM
Volitics Volitics is offline
Contributing User
Dev Articles Newbie (0 - 499 posts)
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Knoxville, Tennessee (U.S.A.)
Posts: 58 Volitics User rank is Just a Lowly Private (1 - 20 Reputation Level) 
Time spent in forums: 5 m 15 sec
Reputation Power: 12
Will 800 pixel .gif image fit in a 640x480 monitor?

I have just one monitor at my work station. My monitor is an 800 x 600 size monitor. Therefore I cannot test the way my web site's images look on different size monitors.

I'm sure most of you have seen the newer banner advertisements on the Yahoo! dot com web site. The large ones stretch all the way from left to right on an 800 x 600 pixel monitor screen.

If I place a similar 800 pixel wide banner advertisement on my web site will the ad fit into a smaller 640x480 size monitor or will a left-right scroll bar appear on the smaller monitors screen? In other words, will the 800 pixel wide image automatically fit the smaller monitor or will 800 pixel wide image be too large for the screen?

Thank you for your assistance.

Best Regards;

Volitics

Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old May 17th, 2003, 07:37 PM
Vince Vince is offline
LordNitrous
Dev Articles Newbie (0 - 499 posts)
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: England
Posts: 134 Vince User rank is Just a Lowly Private (1 - 20 Reputation Level) 
Time spent in forums: < 1 sec
Reputation Power: 12
no, the image will expand the page...however using JavaScript I think you can allow different images to be shown for different screen resolutions...
__________________
You don't deserve to read my signature...yeah! That's it, keep walking...yeah walk away from me! That's it! Get out of my pub, you're barred!

Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old May 17th, 2003, 07:58 PM
Volitics Volitics is offline
Contributing User
Dev Articles Newbie (0 - 499 posts)
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Knoxville, Tennessee (U.S.A.)
Posts: 58 Volitics User rank is Just a Lowly Private (1 - 20 Reputation Level) 
Time spent in forums: 5 m 15 sec
Reputation Power: 12
Vince;

Thank you for your kind help.

Best Regards;

Volitics

Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old May 17th, 2003, 09:54 PM
Ben Rowe
Guest
Dev Articles Newbie (0 - 499 posts)
 
Posts: n/a  
Time spent in forums:
Reputation Power:
actually that is wrong, it depends on a few things. If you just displaying the image, then it will be bigger then the screen, however if the path is in an img tag, you can specify the height, width. so instead of specifying the size in px, do it in percentages.

This 'should' resize the image to what ever container its in (ie: if its in a table 100x100 the image will be 100x100)

Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old May 17th, 2003, 10:09 PM
stumpy's Avatar
stumpy stumpy is offline
May contain nuts.
Dev Articles Regular (2000 - 2499 posts)
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,056 stumpy User rank is Just a Lowly Private (1 - 20 Reputation Level) 
Time spent in forums: 5 h 44 m 22 sec
Reputation Power: 0
I think what Vince meant is that you can dynamically choose an image based on the users resolution settings. I've used this method a few times and it works quite well.

What you would need to do it make a smaller version of the image especially for 640x480 users (You don't need to cater for them anymore as they only make up ~2% of users. Unless of course you're doing a site especially for them).

Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old May 18th, 2003, 01:50 AM
Ben Rowe
Guest
Dev Articles Newbie (0 - 499 posts)
 
Posts: n/a  
Time spent in forums:
Reputation Power:
mosts sites dont even design for 640x480 any more, not even amazon any more (some of there pages still do, but the majority dont)

even windows XP comes standard at 800 x 600 now

Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old May 18th, 2003, 07:29 AM
Vince Vince is offline
LordNitrous
Dev Articles Newbie (0 - 499 posts)
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: England
Posts: 134 Vince User rank is Just a Lowly Private (1 - 20 Reputation Level) 
Time spent in forums: < 1 sec
Reputation Power: 12
if you resize an image using HTML it looks all ugly and squashed which is why I said to use different images made at different sizes so you get the nicest results. anyway you shud design for 800 by 600 really because hardly anyone uses the lower resolutions and if they do they are probably used to having wide pages...

Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old May 18th, 2003, 08:38 AM
Volitics Volitics is offline
Contributing User
Dev Articles Newbie (0 - 499 posts)
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Knoxville, Tennessee (U.S.A.)
Posts: 58 Volitics User rank is Just a Lowly Private (1 - 20 Reputation Level) 
Time spent in forums: 5 m 15 sec
Reputation Power: 12
Vince, Ben, stumpy;

I've been getting the 'screen size' and the 'resolution' confused.

I'm thinking that I may not even need to bother with the resolution with regards to my web site.

On my web site I have a table, which emcompasses the entire index page of my web site, set at a width of "100%". But the smaller tables on the inside I used to have set at widths of, for example, "250" and "175" - both stated in pixels.

What got me started worrying about all of this was I was in a person's office the other day. They had a real nice LCD flat screen monitor. We looked at my web site on their monitor. The index page stretched all the way across their monitor - like it should have. But the smaller tables inside the main table were proportionately smaller. There was a lot of white space between the tables.

I quickly came home and changed all of the inside table widths to "percentages" instead of "pixels".

Please permit me to change my original question:

Can 15" monitor screens, 17" monitor screens, 19" monitor screens, and larger screens all have 800 x 600 resolutions or must a 15" screen have a 640 x 480 resolution, a 17" screen an 800 x 600 resolution, a 19" screen a 1024 x 768 resolution, and so forth?

Or in other words, is the 'resolution' only a function of the operating system and not related to the monitor size?

Thank you for your help.

Volitics

Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old May 18th, 2003, 09:32 AM
stumpy's Avatar
stumpy stumpy is offline
May contain nuts.
Dev Articles Regular (2000 - 2499 posts)
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,056 stumpy User rank is Just a Lowly Private (1 - 20 Reputation Level) 
Time spent in forums: 5 h 44 m 22 sec
Reputation Power: 0
Screen size refers to the actual physical size of the monitor - and is measured in inches.

Resolution is the number of pixels on screen. Resolution is determined by the monitor and the graphics card. Usually, the bigger the monitor, the higher you'll want the resolution to be. E.g., on a 21" monitor, you want to be getting at least 1600x1200, otherwise eveything will look "pixely". Conversely, using that kind of res on a 15" monitor would be silly as you wouldn't be able to see anything. (the monitor probably wouldn't even support it.)

There are two main methods of building a website - one is to use the "stretchy" method, setting your table (or DIV's) width to percentages - this way you can utilise the entire area provided on screen, and will change depending on the users setup.

The other method is the fixed width method, where you set the table widths in pixels. Almost half of the internet's users are still using 800x600 resolution, which means that if you are going to use the fixed width method, your table should not be set wider than 770 pixels across. (you have to account for the browsers scrollbars and borders)

Hope that's cleared it all up!

Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old May 18th, 2003, 12:13 PM
Volitics Volitics is offline
Contributing User
Dev Articles Newbie (0 - 499 posts)
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Knoxville, Tennessee (U.S.A.)
Posts: 58 Volitics User rank is Just a Lowly Private (1 - 20 Reputation Level) 
Time spent in forums: 5 m 15 sec
Reputation Power: 12
I've Got It Figured Out Now

Stumpy, Vince, Ben;

Thank you for your help.

I've been tinkering with the 'Settings' in the 'Display Properties' found in the 'Control Panel' on my Windows operating system. I can change the settings from as low as 640 x 480 all the way up to 1280 x 1024.

I see how it works now.

Thank you again for your help.

Best Regards;

Volitics

Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old May 18th, 2003, 01:00 PM
Vince Vince is offline
LordNitrous
Dev Articles Newbie (0 - 499 posts)
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: England
Posts: 134 Vince User rank is Just a Lowly Private (1 - 20 Reputation Level) 
Time spent in forums: < 1 sec
Reputation Power: 12
or, if you use Dreamweaver MX you can change the screen size of the design window to whatever resolution you need.

Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old May 25th, 2003, 11:15 AM
FrankieShakes FrankieShakes is offline
Frank The Tank!
Dev Articles Beginner (1000 - 1499 posts)
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 1,240 FrankieShakes User rank is Just a Lowly Private (1 - 20 Reputation Level) 
Time spent in forums: < 1 sec
Reputation Power: 14
Send a message via ICQ to FrankieShakes Send a message via MSN to FrankieShakes
Quote:
Originally posted by Vince
or, if you use Dreamweaver MX you can change the screen size of the design window to whatever resolution you need.


Vince... I didn't know that was possible... Where in MX is that option available?
__________________
____________________________________________
Developer Shed Weekly Writer | DevArticles Forum Moderator
Build Your Own KlipFolio Klip With PHP
FrankManno.com - Under Construction
Design Interactive Group - Under Construction

Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old May 25th, 2003, 06:09 PM
Selleri Selleri is offline
Contributing User
Dev Articles Newbie (0 - 499 posts)
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Iceland
Posts: 46 Selleri User rank is Just a Lowly Private (1 - 20 Reputation Level) 
Time spent in forums: 39 sec
Reputation Power: 12
On the bottom right side of the current document you are working with in DW you should see something like this: 583x584 | 1k / 1 sec (see attachment)

If the document is maximised you can only edit the sizes but if you "restore down" (as winXP calls it ) you can choose what screen size your document should be.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg dw_sizes.jpg (16.9 KB, 749 views)

Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old June 8th, 2003, 02:41 PM
FrankieShakes FrankieShakes is offline
Frank The Tank!
Dev Articles Beginner (1000 - 1499 posts)
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 1,240 FrankieShakes User rank is Just a Lowly Private (1 - 20 Reputation Level) 
Time spent in forums: < 1 sec
Reputation Power: 14
Send a message via ICQ to FrankieShakes Send a message via MSN to FrankieShakes
Quote:
Originally posted by Selleri
On the bottom right side of the current document you are working with in DW you should see something like this: 583x584 | 1k / 1 sec (see attachment)

If the document is maximised you can only edit the sizes but if you "restore down" (as winXP calls it ) you can choose what screen size your document should be.


It's greyed out for me... And I don't have MX maximized...

What does it actually do? I gotta figure out how to get it to work for me!

Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old June 8th, 2003, 06:41 PM
Selleri Selleri is offline
Contributing User
Dev Articles Newbie (0 - 499 posts)
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Iceland
Posts: 46 Selleri User rank is Just a Lowly Private (1 - 20 Reputation Level) 
Time spent in forums: 39 sec
Reputation Power: 12
Strange!
What it does is it makes your document workspace of the right size for the given resolution(hope I'm not misunderstanding you) you are aiming at.

Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old June 10th, 2003, 06:51 PM
FrankieShakes FrankieShakes is offline
Frank The Tank!
Dev Articles Beginner (1000 - 1499 posts)
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 1,240 FrankieShakes User rank is Just a Lowly Private (1 - 20 Reputation Level) 
Time spent in forums: < 1 sec
Reputation Power: 14
Send a message via ICQ to FrankieShakes Send a message via MSN to FrankieShakes
I'll have to fool around with it a little more... Maybe I'm not doing something properly...

I'm still fairly new to MX, so it's a new concept for me!

I'll let you know how it goes... Btw, how's the J2ME coding coming along for you?

Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old June 11th, 2003, 12:21 PM
Selleri Selleri is offline
Contributing User
Dev Articles Newbie (0 - 499 posts)
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Iceland
Posts: 46 Selleri User rank is Just a Lowly Private (1 - 20 Reputation Level) 
Time spent in forums: 39 sec
Reputation Power: 12
Haven't used it for a while, finished the course and spent the last weeks programming in C#

Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old June 12th, 2003, 06:03 PM
FrankieShakes FrankieShakes is offline
Frank The Tank!
Dev Articles Beginner (1000 - 1499 posts)
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 1,240 FrankieShakes User rank is Just a Lowly Private (1 - 20 Reputation Level) 
Time spent in forums: < 1 sec
Reputation Power: 14
Send a message via ICQ to FrankieShakes Send a message via MSN to FrankieShakes
Quote:
Originally posted by Selleri
Haven't used it for a while, finished the course and spent the last weeks programming in C#



Hahaha... 2 completely different worlds my friend!! hehehe...

Actually, I just started reading my J2ME book (Core J2ME by John Muchow), and I am loving it... Although I have yet to code anything (I'm still on the theory part), I'm getting excited with each page turn! LOL How geeky is that!!

Although I read that J2ME doesn't support Floating point... Does that include Doubles as well... Would you know?

Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old June 12th, 2003, 06:13 PM
Selleri Selleri is offline
Contributing User
Dev Articles Newbie (0 - 499 posts)
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Iceland
Posts: 46 Selleri User rank is Just a Lowly Private (1 - 20 Reputation Level) 
Time spent in forums: 39 sec
Reputation Power: 12
Frankly I don't remember it of the top of my head.

Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old June 12th, 2003, 08:07 PM
FrankieShakes FrankieShakes is offline
Frank The Tank!
Dev Articles Beginner (1000 - 1499 posts)
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 1,240 FrankieShakes User rank is Just a Lowly Private (1 - 20 Reputation Level) 
Time spent in forums: < 1 sec
Reputation Power: 14
Send a message via ICQ to FrankieShakes Send a message via MSN to FrankieShakes
Quote:
Originally posted by Selleri
Frankly I don't remember it of the top of my head.


No problem... That C# has you all messed up!

Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old June 12th, 2003, 08:09 PM
Selleri Selleri is offline
Contributing User
Dev Articles Newbie (0 - 499 posts)
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Iceland
Posts: 46 Selleri User rank is Just a Lowly Private (1 - 20 Reputation Level) 
Time spent in forums: 39 sec
Reputation Power: 12
Quote:
Originally posted by FrankieShakes


No problem... That C# has you all messed up!



Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old June 12th, 2003, 08:12 PM
FrankieShakes FrankieShakes is offline
Frank The Tank!
Dev Articles Beginner (1000 - 1499 posts)
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 1,240 FrankieShakes User rank is Just a Lowly Private (1 - 20 Reputation Level) 
Time spent in forums: < 1 sec
Reputation Power: 14
Send a message via ICQ to FrankieShakes Send a message via MSN to FrankieShakes
Quote:
Originally posted by Selleri




How are you finding C# as opposed to Java? You did come from a Java background, right? Or was it just J2ME?

Have you not had time to continue with J2ME or is it just a personal decision?

Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old June 12th, 2003, 08:30 PM
Selleri Selleri is offline
Contributing User
Dev Articles Newbie (0 - 499 posts)
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Iceland
Posts: 46 Selleri User rank is Just a Lowly Private (1 - 20 Reputation Level) 
Time spent in forums: 39 sec
Reputation Power: 12
Turbo Pascal
C++
MFC
JAVA
J2SE
J2EE
J2ME
C#

This is the order.

I haven't gotten a time to pursue the J2ME programming and I'm not sure if I'll spend a great
deal going down that path unless I get a job in that sector.
Although my new phone is java enabled so maybe I'll try to write some neat program this summer for it.
But as the web projects are taking a lot of time I dobut it.

As to the never ending debate about java vs. c# I have to admit that I'm in love with c#.
I've never enjoyed window programming until I started doing it in C# then it was like a whole
new world to me that I didn't see in MFC or java.

Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old June 13th, 2003, 05:57 PM
FrankieShakes FrankieShakes is offline
Frank The Tank!
Dev Articles Beginner (1000 - 1499 posts)
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 1,240 FrankieShakes User rank is Just a Lowly Private (1 - 20 Reputation Level) 
Time spent in forums: < 1 sec
Reputation Power: 14
Send a message via ICQ to FrankieShakes Send a message via MSN to FrankieShakes
Quote:
Originally posted by Selleri
Turbo Pascal
C++
MFC
JAVA
J2SE
J2EE
J2ME
C#

This is the order.

I haven't gotten a time to pursue the J2ME programming and I'm not sure if I'll spend a great
deal going down that path unless I get a job in that sector.
Although my new phone is java enabled so maybe I'll try to write some neat program this summer for it.
But as the web projects are taking a lot of time I dobut it.

As to the never ending debate about java vs. c# I have to admit that I'm in love with c#.
I've never enjoyed window programming until I started doing it in C# then it was like a whole
new world to me that I didn't see in MFC or java.


Wow... That's some track record!

Well, it's a personal decision... I guess if you're interested in that sort of thing it's for you... I've got a very high interest in mobile devices, so it's very exciting for me...

As to the C# thing... A classmate of mine said the same thing... He's very Pro-Microsoft, so I guess he would like C# either way!

What about C# do you like much more than you do Java?

I debated with myself as to whether or not I should dabble in C#, and I decided that for the time being, I'll stick to Java...

Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old June 15th, 2003, 06:07 AM
Selleri Selleri is offline
Contributing User
Dev Articles Newbie (0 - 499 posts)
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Iceland
Posts: 46 Selleri User rank is Just a Lowly Private (1 - 20 Reputation Level) 
Time spent in forums: 39 sec
Reputation Power: 12
Quote:
Originally posted by FrankieShakes

Wow... That's some track record!


Guess I can thank school for something then.

I think it's easier to work in C# and maintain the n-tier architecture than doing the same in java with ejb.
But otherwise I hold them as high

Reply With Quote
Reply

Viewing: Dev Articles Community ForumsWeb DesignWeb Development > Will 800 pixel .gif image fit in a 640x480 monitor?


Developer Shed Advertisers and Affiliates


Thread Tools  Search this Thread 
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes  Rate This Thread 
Rate This Thread:


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
View Your Warnings | New Posts | Latest News | Latest Threads | Shoutbox
Forum Jump

Forums: » Register « |  User CP |  Games |  Calendar |  Members |  FAQs |  Sitemap |  Support | 
  
 


Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.0.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

© 2003-2014 by Developer Shed. All rights reserved. DS Cluster - Follow our Sitemap