Fluid or Fixed Width

Do you prefer a fixed-width or a fluid forum style? Is there any particular reason you have this preference?

I personally prefer a fixed-width. I hate it when the forum goes from edge-to-edge on my monitor.

 

I actually prefer it to be about an inch away from each side of my monitor. But depending on the size of your monitor (or screen resolution), a fixed-width can have a lot more space on either side than you think it does. That is why I like to make my skins be about 80% instead of a pixel value.

 

I like to use the fluid styles. It might just be that I'm usually on larger monitors supporting higher resolution since I don't like seeing large chunks of the background. At the same time, I tweak my styles to ensure that they will display properly on 1024x768 monitors. Like Savage X, I look to use 85% to 90% for the width.

 

I too go for roughly 80%

 

I mostly design fluid styles. There are way too many monitor width sizes and resolutions nowadays. I want my styles to look the same for every member of a forum, regardless of monitor size of resolution, and most of my clients feel the same.

I don't like fixed width styles at all - the huge amounts of background that I have to look at on either side of the forum - wasted real estate, imo.

 

I generally like using a fixed-width skin. I primarily browse on a 13" widescreen and a 22" widescreen, and I prefer a look that is consistent as I move back and forth between display sizes.

 

I prefer fixed-width because that is the best one then you can add stuff and not need to changes alot of codes to have it working with different monitors. I have a big monitor but if you use screens resolution 800x600 then fluid style mostly gets screwed up.

And if you use a very big then the style gets to big.

And with this said I am a fan of sidebars so i often have a sidebar on my forum on every page.

 

a truly consistent look would be the fluid width.

Fluid width looks the same on every monitor, regardless of screen width or resolution.

 

I generally prefer fixed width. If I do ever use fluid width, I use it with a minimum width (and often maximum width) in order to make sure everything remains nice and clean. Fixed width is easier to handle because the content of the page - which is all that really matters - is easier to handle.

That's not entirely true. Smaller screens would have a tendency to make websites look more cluttered, as there's less space to display something than on a larger screen. Fixed width prevents that as the primary content of the website would look the same on every screen. Background space would vary, but the layout of the site from screen to screen would be predictable and is much easier to manage.

 

Not entirely true The website would look cluttered only if the designer didn't pay attention to the smaller width during the course of designing.

If the designer keeps the smaller resolution/monitor width in mind when designing, we can be sure that the style looks just as nice and neat on smaller screens as well as larger. I have 3 monitors - a 15", 19" and 21" widescreen, and usually design on 1024 x 768, always checking during the process to be sure that the design is fine on larger monitors, as well as other browsers.

On fixed width designs, the primary content is the same, but the blank space of the background is a distraction. Especially on larger monitors.

 

I generally don't mind the blank background space - I just find it to look better.

 

So do I. I actually prefer a design that has quite a bit of background in the margin. Especially when the background has some little design or pattern rather than being a solid color.

 

ugh no pattern on a fixed width, unless it's a very faint or muted pattern. Sends my adhd into overdrive, lol.

 

:lol:

 

haha laugh now. Wait'll you see it in overdrive.

 

Personally, I'm starting to dig the fixed width sites more and more.

I'm using a fixed width on one of my sites and I like being able to see things exactly as I know others will see it.

On the fluid styles, you have to design with both smaller and larger monitor in mind. Because if you design it too cluttered for small and decide to go the other way, it seems like it would be too spaced out for the fluid styles. So, I think that a fixed width is the way to go for my personal choice.

And, I for one do NOT want to see Peggy's 'dark side' kick-in!

 

I prefer fluid with constraints...

body {
width:98%;
min-width: 760px;
max-width: 1200 px;
}

Fluid because you allowed more leeway in placement of your items and your floats work better provided your remember to clear your columns properly. Constrained because you don't want the text to get too wide as it becomes difficult to read. Now personally, I don't browse with my browser maximized. 1440 pixels wide is too much and there is so much left-right that is causes eyestrain. Its easier to move the page into your vision than to scan left and right constantly.

The minimum size is because I am kind of snobbish. If you can't use 9 year old technology and be on a CRT that supports 800 X 600, then you should suffer the consequences. The maximum width is because I don't want to cause the afore mentioned eyestrain on my users.

 

EXACTLY!!!!

hey hey hey now.... some people can't afford anything more. I used to be one of them.

/end rant. I'm a "for the underdog" kinda gal.

 

I understand there are circumstances like this but I don't have to cater to them. Net neutrality stops at access, it doesn't guarantee that designers have to cater to older technology.

 

I love this, especially when the pattern is thick diagonal stripes of two alternating shades of the same color.