Jay said:

I'll just quote myself from the other topic in Feature Requests:

Jay said:

I'm glad I get feedback like this and definitely want to continue this discussion. I'm a huge proponent of usability and want to hear from everyone.

While I see many forums with layouts that expand to fit the available space, I see very few good web sites that do. I don't understand--at all--how people read long forum posts on a widescreen monitor with lines of text that stretch into infinity. I think Windows has done a horrible job of training people over the last 10 years to expect windows to fill all available space and for the content to follow suit; ironically, one of the things Windows has always done worse than Mac is managing the actual windows :)

In my experience, moving from variable width to fixed width is jarring at first simply because it's different. Once people become accustomed to it, going back to variable width looks strange...mostly because it is. Shifting blocks of content to make better use of available space is fine and makes sense with web content expected to be viewed on monitors of various sizes, but stretching out the text on linear user-based content so it flows across an entire widescreen monitor is simply bizarre, and a fine example of learned behavior.

I'm not entirely sure why you feel the need to increase the zoom level on your browser here, but not elsewhere. We use a pretty standard 12 pixel font size for posts (typical for forums and larger than a lot of sites). The quote font size is smaller so it takes up less space, but I'm working on a solution for that as well (showing only the first few lines of a quote and letting the user hover/click to view the rest). None of these things have changed in the new layout and they won't change if I add a skin that's variable width. I am concerned to hear that you find that this site requires more zooming than others, so please post more thoughts on this point if you can.

I'm working on the image solution. I know it's a problem. But, as I said here, all these large images are a nuisance and they have to go. Again, only in forums do I see this kind of content. Good sites manage images much more cleanly through thumbnails and zooming. Large images embedded within the content simply don't work on the web. Users should be linking to these images, not embedding them.

Fixed width vs. variable width is a longstanding debate, and like all usability decisions, what works for many or most people will leave a few people displeased because people are different. The best you can do is choose what you think is the best decision based on your experience and then provide an easy out for those who don't fit into that mold--in this case, an optional variable width layout.

 

I tried to find the option for the widescreen format, but couldn't find it, where is it? Does it still exist? Most people have widescreen monitors these days, is it really necessary to accommodate a small minority at the expense of the rest of us? 

TV's Frink said:

Ghostbusters said:

Most people have widescreen monitors these days, is it really necessary to accommodate a small minority at the expense of the rest of us? 

Do most people browse in a maximized window the size of Texas?  I have no interest in reading a twelve sentence paragraph that fits on one line.

How did you know how big my monitor was? My monitor is 46". I like to browse with the browser window maximized and I usually have like 30 tabs going at a time.

TV's Frink said:

Ghostbusters said:

TV's Frink said:

Ghostbusters said:

Most people have widescreen monitors these days, is it really necessary to accommodate a small minority at the expense of the rest of us? 

Do most people browse in a maximized window the size of Texas?  I have no interest in reading a twelve sentence paragraph that fits on one line.

How did you know how big my monitor was? My monitor is 46". I like to browse with the browser window maximized and I usually have like 30 tabs going at a time.

My family has a long history of psychic abilities.  I'm just starting to tune into mine.

Really?

TV's Frink said:

Yes.

If you are so psychic why couldn't you foresee me being a clown in the Off Topic About Adywan's Revisited Projects Thread?