What Is Your Screen Resolution?

What is your Monitor Screen Resolution?

  • 800 x 600

    Votes: 3 3.9%
  • 1024 x 768

    Votes: 20 26.3%
  • 1280 x 800

    Votes: 10 13.2%
  • 1280 x 1024

    Votes: 14 18.4%
  • 1152 x 864

    Votes: 5 6.6%
  • 1440 x 900

    Votes: 10 13.2%
  • Something Not Listed Here

    Votes: 14 18.4%

  • Total voters
    76
  • Poll closed .

Vaughn McMillan

Administrator
Staff member
Messages
36,054
Location
ABQ NM
I'm doing some research and would like to know the resolution at which you run your computer monitor(s). If you don't know, you can right-click on your desktop and select Properties. Click the Settings tab, and the Screen resolution section will show the resolution you've got set. (That's for Windows XP. Vista is probably something similar.)

Thanks for the input -
 
For Vista, click on the Microsoft button at the bottom left, then select "Control Panel". Next select "Personalize", then "Display Settings". That will tell you what you have your display set to.

Mike
 
I'm doing some research and would like to know the resolution at which you run your computer monitor(s). If you don't know, you can right-click on your desktop and select Properties. Click the Settings tab, and the Screen resolution section will show the resolution you've got set. (That's for Windows XP. Vista is probably something similar.)

Thanks for the input -

And on mac you can open "System Preferences" then "Displays".

My iMac is running at 1920x1200. :D

And this poll only allows me to vote once. ....

WHICH computer, I regularly use five :D

... This.

My iMac is my home beast. At work I've got a dual-monitor setup and I'll have to post that info once I get in to work on Monday. I know that the smaller of the two is set to 1280x1024 (17" LCD) but I don't know what the larger 22" widescreen is set at.

Now my creeky old (5yrs) mac laptop runs at just 1024x768, but that is just fine for a laptop that sees light use.

I find all of these to be nice and crisp and give a good sized readable font for me. Actually, font size is probably one of the issues isn't it? I just have mine at the defaults, but you can adjust the font size regardless of the display resolution, can't you?
 
1024 x 768 but only because I run an ancient 17" Dell analog CRT (yes, CRT) at home. After working with computers for almost 30 years, I find no fascination with them at home. They are a tool. At work I run higher but, of course, have a better monitor/card/etc.
 
Make it three for me.

Home office: XP Pro with 22" 16/9 screen at 1680x1050

Shop: XP Home with 17" 4/3 screen at 1280x1024

Laptop: Vista with 15" 16/9 screen at 1280x800

:type:
 
Not to stick a fly in yer ointment, but like all the others it depends on which system I'm using. The truth of the matter is that I run 'em at the max resolution possible - i'm a sucker for screen space :D

Bein' as I build web sites for a living, I have had this same question over the years. I once wrote a little javascript to take a real-world count of the most popular screen resolutions back in the day.

Thankfully, there's a much easier way, today, with Google Analytics. Just plop their little ping code onto yer page somewhere and wait a few days. You'll get some really good details about your site visitors (browsers, resolutions, operating systems, etc, etc) plus all sorts of web traffic info.

Of the 50 or so sites I maintain, 1024x768 is the most common by a mile. then it's pretty even for 2nd between 800x600 and 1280x1024. Beyond that it gets pretty obscure. We design all our sites for 1024 screen width since that's the dominant resolution. :)
 
... Of the 50 or so sites I maintain, 1024x768 is the most common by a mile. then it's pretty even for 2nd between 800x600 and 1280x1024. Beyond that it gets pretty obscure. We design all our sites for 1024 screen width since that's the dominant resolution. :)

Thanks Jason. That's really the info I'm after. I've just finished up a new site, but it's wider than a 1024 x 768 monitor wants to display. If I make it fit the 1024 pixel width, it looks funky at higher resolution. Unfortunately I'm using a non-dynamic graphic as a banner at the top of each page, and using a pre-made dynamic PHP template. I guess I'll come up with another workaround for the banner. Based on the poll numbers I'm seeing here and on other sites, 1024 x 768 isn't as prevalent as it used to be, but it's still being used enough to warrant a change to the site.
 
Wow, Vaughn! Big site improvement! Did you just do that? Very cool!

You're right about that banner graphic, though. When I resize my browser, it just scrolls off the the right. Everything else seems to rearrange just fine. Are you stuck with the graphic?

Thanks,

Bill
 
Thanks Jason. That's really the info I'm after. I've just finished up a new site, but it's wider than a 1024 x 768 monitor wants to display. If I make it fit the 1024 pixel width, it looks funky at higher resolution. Unfortunately I'm using a non-dynamic graphic as a banner at the top of each page, and using a pre-made dynamic PHP template. I guess I'll come up with another workaround for the banner. Based on the poll numbers I'm seeing here and on other sites, 1024 x 768 isn't as prevalent as it used to be, but it's still being used enough to warrant a change to the site.

It's always funny ... when I ask people what their resolutions are, I get vastly higher trends toward the higher resolutions. But I have google analytics running on 20 or so of my sites and every single one of them, regardless of audience, leans heavily toward 1024 - like 35% heavily ... 800x600 and 1280x1024 split 2nd place at about 18% each with 800x600 shrinking over the last year or so and 1280 growing.

I celebrated 10 years in my job about a month ago and I was all nostalgic about the "olden days" of the web back when I was just getting started. 640x480 was the width you HAD to design for back then - it was a huge deal when we went up to 800x600 - it lasted for a good 4-5 years at 800x600. About 2 years ago 1024 officially took over as most common and has steadily grown and 640x480 is nearly completely extinct these days.

I get lots of clients who want to fix the funky look in wider resolutions. Two things we tell them: a snazzy background can help reduce the boredom and it's been our experience that most people do not run maximized anyway. Most users like to keep their desktops visible all the time (i'm not one of those people) and so their browsers are nearly always smaller which helps to reduce some concern about the visual weirdness in wider windows.

It's all voodoo, really :p :p :p
 
Oh - about that top banner ...

It could be done with the gradient as a background image, aligned to the left (going white to blue) with a background color of the final blue so that when windows extend to the right, it'll just keep going blue over there.

That's probably how I'd cut it :)

Edit: I'd cut your banner at about 960 - that's a guaranteed width to fit in a 1024 window given the strange themes that people run with these days. Scroll bars on the right are always different widths and I like the extra 10-15 pixels for insurance :D
 
Thanks Jason. That's along the lines of what I was thinking. It's sort of what I had in place, although my color match at the end of the gradient was off. I just now re-did it and and made the banner 900 pixels wide. That should help. :thumb:
 
Vaughn - I am one of the few that still use 1024x768. I have a 17" screen and I find I can read the screen without reading glasses when it is set at 1024 - so its all a comfort thing for me!
 
Vaughn - I am one of the few that still use 1024x768. I have a 17" screen and I find I can read the screen without reading glasses when it is set at 1024 - so its all a comfort thing for me!
How's it looking now, Steve? I just changed the banner, and from what I'm seeing here, the only page that's still too wide is the home page. As soon as I figure out how to display the category pics in three columns instead of four, I should have that page closer to fitting, too.
 
Top