7 ms·

I recently tried to switch to using non-fullsize browser windows, which is pretty much the reason for windows I think, but so many sites force huge page widths

by nodata 16y ago

I recently tried to switch to using non-fullsize browser windows, which is pretty much the reason for windows I think, but so many sites force huge page widths that it becomes unusable.

frou_dh 16y ago
I always use a ~1024w browser window on a 1920w screen and have no problems. For MS Windows users, I think "Maximise Everything" is ingrained at this point, which gets increasingly ridiculous on high res screens since we don't have resolution independence.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
- sudont 16y ago
  There's diminishing returns on increasing column width; the human eye starts to get strained if reading columns wider than ~60 characters. If the increased page width is applied to design elements and increasing font size, sure. That's not so bad of an application. However, the English language's z pattern is inherently vertical, meaning that a page should naturally have space on either side; forcing a window to fullscreen just to have a 33% column of text is asinine, and shows that the designer is a prick for thinking strictly for XP and Windows' maximize button. You're right about Windows' "Maximize Everything" being weird, it seems more and more like it was a good stopgap for people switching over from DOS and needing all the pixels possible on a tiny screen. OS X's natural flow for page windows may get confused from time-to-time, but it's a much better solution for dealing with vertically-biased windows in a widescreen environment.
  - guelo 16y ago
    > the human eye starts to get strained if reading columns wider than ~60 characters Weird, I had no problem reading your comment even though HN is formatting it for me at around 180 chars.
    - ttdi 16y ago
      It's not necessarily something you notice. It gradually gets a bit more difficult once you start getting past that point. And you won't necessarily think "oh, this is so hard to read" either (at least at large-but-still-reasonable widths). It'll just end up being a factor you weigh (if not consciously) when deciding "okay, I've had enough with reading this" and go on to the next thing.
- pseale 16y ago
  Hope for the future: Windows 7 introduced a new hotkey that resizes windows to take up either the left or right half of the screen: WIN+LEFTARROW or WIN+RIGHTARROW.
  - henrikgs 16y ago
    Im sorry if this was a joke and I didn't get it, but Windows 7 does exactly that
    - martinkallstrom 16y ago
      You misread the comment; read the first sentence as "[there is] hope for the future", not "[this is my] hope for the future"
    - deleted 16y ago
      [deleted]
  - iaskwhy 16y ago
    Or you could just move the window to the left or right side and it will do just that, no keys involved.
    - iaskwhy 16y ago
      I'd love to understand why someone would mod down my comment. I believe it's my first time, it's insightful so there was no reason to mod it down is it?
      - frou_dh 16y ago
        At a guess they don't realise that triggers a size snap and thought you meant simply do it manually.
        iaskwhy 16y ago
        Oh, thanks, I guess I can see that happening now that you say it! Should have been clearer like gxti did sometime after.
- wiredfool 16y ago
  My browser windows have been approx 1/2 of my screen width for as long as I can remember, at least on desktop machines. (terminals and emacs through, more like 1/3)
  - pyre 16y ago
    Even on a 1024x600 netbook?
    - wiredfool 16y ago
      No, the netbook is usually maximized (ubuntu netbook remix), but back when I had a PowerBook duo, the end of the 030era, I was running windows about 400px wide on a 640 px screen. Screens have gotten bigger, but for desktops, vie generally been at about 1/2 the screen, and laptops at 1/2-2/3 or so. I've gotten into some epic... Discussions of fluid layouts and how just because my browser was reporting lots a pixels, the layout wasn't getting them.
- joe_the_user 16y ago
  The problem is that if you don't maximize everything, you'll wind-up with a series of windows which overlap in a less than useful fashion - menus, scrollbars and headlines get obscured and you need to mouse-around-the-screen to do anything. There are dual problems here. Window Managers are designed to give a "comforting intuitive interface" rather than an interface which lets you do things quickly. But also, manufacturers pump out wide screens intended for video viewing rather than long screens which are suited for text viewing. This also means a good portion of web pages use fixed-width pages to keep from being stretched to unreadability. But these also keep the text from being read from a narrow screen (sure, they could set a max width with CSS but fixed-width also lets the designer guarantee their design looks exactly as they wish).
ugh 16y ago
Usually my browser windows are about 700 pixels wide. That’s half of my horizontal pixels. The vast majority of websites are no problem (text columns are usually no more than 700 pixels wide for readability reasons, I don’t care when I have to scroll horizontally to access other columns because my trackpad supports two-finger scrolling), some inherently need more pixels (The Big Picture wants to display big pictures and there is nothing wrong with that) and some just break (i.e. text becomes completely unreadable). I would be very happy if someone would fix those tiny minority of sometimes otherwise very fancy websites.
joe_the_user 16y ago
I recently tried to switch to using non-fullsize browser windows, which is pretty much the reason for windows I think Yes, the idea that you would using multi, non-maximized windows at one time is behind the design of window managers. Now, this model of interacting with a computer has been a success in the sense that it's how most computers are now organized today. However, this model has been a complete failure in the sense that few people ever use non-maximized windows because they coordinate so badly. This is the reason browser tabs have replaced browser windows and indeed why the browser as an interface is easier to understand than the desktop interface ("just get me to a browser window and then I'll know where to go...").

by nodata 16y ago

I recently tried to switch to using non-fullsize browser windows, which is pretty much the reason for windows I think, but so many sites force huge page widths that it becomes unusable.

frou_dh 16y ago

I always use a ~1024w browser window on a 1920w screen and have no problems. For MS Windows users, I think "Maximise Everything" is ingrained at this point, which gets increasingly ridiculous on high res screens since we don't have resolution independence.

deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
sudont 16y ago
There's diminishing returns on increasing column width; the human eye starts to get strained if reading columns wider than ~60 characters. If the increased page width is applied to design elements and increasing font size, sure. That's not so bad of an application. However, the English language's z pattern is inherently vertical, meaning that a page should naturally have space on either side; forcing a window to fullscreen just to have a 33% column of text is asinine, and shows that the designer is a prick for thinking strictly for XP and Windows' maximize button. You're right about Windows' "Maximize Everything" being weird, it seems more and more like it was a good stopgap for people switching over from DOS and needing all the pixels possible on a tiny screen. OS X's natural flow for page windows may get confused from time-to-time, but it's a much better solution for dealing with vertically-biased windows in a widescreen environment.
- guelo 16y ago
  > the human eye starts to get strained if reading columns wider than ~60 characters Weird, I had no problem reading your comment even though HN is formatting it for me at around 180 chars.
  - ttdi 16y ago
    It's not necessarily something you notice. It gradually gets a bit more difficult once you start getting past that point. And you won't necessarily think "oh, this is so hard to read" either (at least at large-but-still-reasonable widths). It'll just end up being a factor you weigh (if not consciously) when deciding "okay, I've had enough with reading this" and go on to the next thing.
pseale 16y ago
Hope for the future: Windows 7 introduced a new hotkey that resizes windows to take up either the left or right half of the screen: WIN+LEFTARROW or WIN+RIGHTARROW.
- henrikgs 16y ago
  Im sorry if this was a joke and I didn't get it, but Windows 7 does exactly that
  - martinkallstrom 16y ago
    You misread the comment; read the first sentence as "[there is] hope for the future", not "[this is my] hope for the future"
  - deleted 16y ago
    [deleted]
- iaskwhy 16y ago
  Or you could just move the window to the left or right side and it will do just that, no keys involved.
  - iaskwhy 16y ago
    I'd love to understand why someone would mod down my comment. I believe it's my first time, it's insightful so there was no reason to mod it down is it?
    - frou_dh 16y ago
      At a guess they don't realise that triggers a size snap and thought you meant simply do it manually.
      - iaskwhy 16y ago
        Oh, thanks, I guess I can see that happening now that you say it! Should have been clearer like gxti did sometime after.
wiredfool 16y ago
My browser windows have been approx 1/2 of my screen width for as long as I can remember, at least on desktop machines. (terminals and emacs through, more like 1/3)
- pyre 16y ago
  Even on a 1024x600 netbook?
  - wiredfool 16y ago
    No, the netbook is usually maximized (ubuntu netbook remix), but back when I had a PowerBook duo, the end of the 030era, I was running windows about 400px wide on a 640 px screen. Screens have gotten bigger, but for desktops, vie generally been at about 1/2 the screen, and laptops at 1/2-2/3 or so. I've gotten into some epic... Discussions of fluid layouts and how just because my browser was reporting lots a pixels, the layout wasn't getting them.
joe_the_user 16y ago
The problem is that if you don't maximize everything, you'll wind-up with a series of windows which overlap in a less than useful fashion - menus, scrollbars and headlines get obscured and you need to mouse-around-the-screen to do anything. There are dual problems here. Window Managers are designed to give a "comforting intuitive interface" rather than an interface which lets you do things quickly. But also, manufacturers pump out wide screens intended for video viewing rather than long screens which are suited for text viewing. This also means a good portion of web pages use fixed-width pages to keep from being stretched to unreadability. But these also keep the text from being read from a narrow screen (sure, they could set a max width with CSS but fixed-width also lets the designer guarantee their design looks exactly as they wish).

ugh 16y ago

Usually my browser windows are about 700 pixels wide. That’s half of my horizontal pixels. The vast majority of websites are no problem (text columns are usually no more than 700 pixels wide for readability reasons, I don’t care when I have to scroll horizontally to access other columns because my trackpad supports two-finger scrolling), some inherently need more pixels (The Big Picture wants to display big pictures and there is nothing wrong with that) and some just break (i.e. text becomes completely unreadable). I would be very happy if someone would fix those tiny minority of sometimes otherwise very fancy websites.

joe_the_user 16y ago

I recently tried to switch to using non-fullsize browser windows, which is pretty much the reason for windows I think Yes, the idea that you would using multi, non-maximized windows at one time is behind the design of window managers. Now, this model of interacting with a computer has been a success in the sense that it's how most computers are now organized today. However, this model has been a complete failure in the sense that few people ever use non-maximized windows because they coordinate so badly. This is the reason browser tabs have replaced browser windows and indeed why the browser as an interface is easier to understand than the desktop interface ("just get me to a browser window and then I'll know where to go...").