Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 8 years ago.
Improve this question
What do people think is the minimum screen size one needs to cater for?
640px?
Is there are hard and fast rule like the old 960px wide?
Thanks
Similar question like;
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/842638/whats-the-standard-minimum-resolution-i-should-support-with-a-website
http://webmasters.stackexchange.com/questions/1423/which-minimum-browser-or-screen-resolution-should-i-target-my-web-apps
Min. resolution for responsive layout that should be supported is 320px X 480px i.e. iPhone resolution.
Yeah totally true what has already been said that the minimum screen size you have to cater to is usually 320px.
Also, I would say that after you deploy the site, you should monitor it frequently with Google Analytics which will tell you what screen-size your website visitors are using.
Today we have a lot of screen sizes. I don't think we have a minimum sreen size. And if we have, probably it will be the iWatch...
http://media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/bb/d1/a2/bbd1a29bf07aa047ac66a74f88751328.jpg
Related
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 5 years ago.
Improve this question
On an average, what should be the size of the image for full-screen background?
I'm currently using a 1920x1080 pixels image, would that be ok or is it too small for desktop size screens?
It depends on the native resolution of your screen.
The image used should match the native resolution of your screen for the best result.
There is a couple of things you can do to adress this issue since people will be using different screen sizes.
Dynamicly generate your background; this limits you to the use of pure symetrical images
Upload multiple sizes of your background image, grab the screen resolution from the users user-agent and display the correct size image.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
I want my desktop to mobile site change flawlessly. So my design for the site it has to be good for any screen resolution size. This causing me using a lot of media query screen. Let say for max 990px, max 800px, max 600px etc. Closer to smaller size, it get a lot of media screen. If possible, I'm using percent, but if not possible, I'll use lots of media screen query. Maybe in total on a single page there's 20 or more media query in total (main css style and plugins)
Is there any set back to this? Any cons? Thanks for the reply.
In short
maintainability
Long document and complex syntax reduces readability and increase pain and effort to modify CSS rules in the future.
performance
Too many media queries add length, longer CSS file would cause user spend more time downloading them into the browser and render the correct view.
For the sake of 'you in the future', design and structure the layout cross varied devices carefully. Some tools like "include-media" and "sass-mq" will surely enhance the readability and save work time as well.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
I have been doing some research about what width you should use for your website if you're not using responsive design.
The most mentioned width where:
960px
978px
980px
My question is since most of these posts where outdated, which one is prefered nowdays?
I want it to scale down so good as possible for mobile devices.
Thanks Jack
Number 960 is divisible with pretty much anything (28 factors, which is a lot), that's the reason it's used the most. This not only scales well, but allows you to divide the page into many, many variants of equal-width column numbers.
And it's probably to stay around as a standard for quite a while (until we get much larger/denser displays).
Mobiles nowadays have no trouble scaling whatever you give them, but it's your task to make sure it looks nice and readable when it's scaled down, even if you decide not to use 960.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
I know responsive units like rem were introduced to make a page properly zoomable, but I wonder if there is any other use case, if modern browsers zoom px-based values, too? They even treat px-based media queries responsively nowadays: if I zoom into a responsive website far enough, it will switch to the mobile layout.
Thank you.
EDIT:
I only know one use case myself: If you want users to set the font-size dynamically on a page (e.g. like in a ebook reader app something like this).
rem was not introduced to make a page "properly zoomable", it was introduced to allow the sizes of things to be set relative to the base font size.
Having content scale based around the font size the user is comfortable reading is useful.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 6 years ago.
Improve this question
I am looking for some guidelines or suggestion, on what is a "good" size for clickable elements when developing for mobile devices?
the common resolution for smart phones like iphone is 320x480.
so maybe go for the size of a finger , like about 44x44.
look here minimum-sensible-button-size-on-iphone
If the mobile device is not touch sensitive (using stylus) then visible 5mm x 5mm can be fine. Exact pixel values depends on the displays dpi (dot per inch) parameter