In Ye Olde Days it was all about fixed width. But I personally prefer fluid width (actually fixed side bars and a fluid content section in the middle). With bigger monitors and larger screen real estate it just makes sense to me.

You'll find this depends on what you do with the site and what it contains. With a fixed with site you have a lot of control. When you move to fluid width you can take much better advantage of screen space but you have to account for lack of control. On top of that, some sites don't have enough information to make fluid width worth wild.

For a web application (like email or a customer relationship manager) a fluid width setup would be fantastic. The larger the screen the more info you can have right in front of you. This is very useful. On the other hand fluid width blogs are rare and typically have a max and min widths so they are only fluid to a point. There is only so much information you want to have on the screen before it looks and feels out of place.

A lot of this is around usefulness and feel. What provides the best user experience?

I know this doesn't answer your question but I hope it helps you understand the topic better. If you share a context someone may be able to help with that case.

Whilst I do feel you need to know the pros and cons of fluid versus fixed, the final decision should be based on the clients wishes and the business case of the project under discussion, including a realistic view of the user base. That may give you the solution for a particular website, even if it makes your job as a designer/programmer a little harder.

My 2 cents worth; I used to tend towards fluid layouts, but over the last few years monitors have been getting wider and wider (yes, I know that there is a confusion between viewport width and monitor width, but the majority of clients still view sites with their browser set to its maximum size). My view now is to product fixed width layouts aimed at a 1024px screen width, and center it. On my laptop, with a 1920 x 1200 screen, a fluid website would look quite stretched out at maximum viewport size, with whole paragraphs fitting onto one line.

HTH,

Pete.

I like fluid when it is appropriate but it is very hard to make something that works in all situations. The church website I work on is fixed/centered because if I stretch it out on a widescreen monitor the short articles turn into one liners and it looks horrible. Not a very good user experience.

I predict more controls and methodologies in the future of the web to adapt to newer technology such as wide-screen monitors.

It's really not about preferring one to another, or at least it shouldn't be. It's all about the application and intent of the site. If your site is publishing articles of some sort, and visual presentation is important, then fixed width is almost necessary. Of course, a 720px-wide layout (which used to be all the rage) looks ridiculous on a 1400px-wide widescreen monitor. So a lot of designers have moved to 990px layouts with the content section on the left and the sidebar(s) on the right. That way, if a user is still using an 800px display, they can read content without having to side-scroll.

For an application, fluid width is almost always appropriate. I'll be using one on the worship planning site I'm working on. The more real estate the better.

One key for all designers to remember: form should flow from function, not the other way around.

Blessings,

Thanks to all of you who posted replies. All responses were very informative and helpful.

The site I'm currently working on is indeed a redesign of my church's web site, porting it from a static ad-hoc mish-mash of 3 or 4 different dot mac webspace page sets to a nice uniform Drupal CMS. My pastor's specifications are to simply keep it looking clean and organized.

I think I'm going to lean towards a fixed width design for them.

With so many different sets of hands ultimately contributing content to the site -- none other than mine knowing any web programming -- I think the "control" factor for the layout and design will be needed, as I doubt anyone other than me will check their content on multiple browsers.

I also really like Matt and Jim's point about some sites not having enough content to make a fluid design work well. Many of my church's content nodes are brief ones, that would indeed end up looking like a single one line sentence if stretched across a wide-screen with a fluid width design.

So, thanks again for the tips.

I'll post the new church site's url when it's live.

Best regards,

Colleen Robledo

My suggestion is that you can use both settings to please both clients and the viewers.

What what I have found that works well is by tricking the viewrs or the clients.

As a designer I personally love the fluid width, because it allows me to be more creative and add more design details around the website design. But at the same time I keep the design layout a fixed width. I can choose a narrow width 780px wide or a wide setting set at 1000px wide. The fixed setting will depend on the client need and the style of design. But by keeping a fixed width of the layout design it allows for all my content to remain nice and neat arrange in paragraphs vs one line of text.

Also by doing the fixed width of the layout, the user, regardless of their monitor setting, will have all the content center on the screen at all times.

Now on to the good stuff.

Now that all that is set I have endless of screen to play with for my background.

I can then add all my visual goodies to the bg that make up the rest of my design. regardless of what seting you use or how wide your monitor is it will be pleasing for all.

Here is an example of my site. Keep in mind it is not exactly as described with graphics at this moment.

http://sabasdesign.com/

But if you your screen is minimized or set for 800px viewing then the entire content is centered. All the content will remain centered regardless of how wide your setings or monitor is.

So for those of you with a wide monitor as you view the site withy our wide settings notice hoe the top bar stretches endlessly as far as your monitor does.

This is a simple example of what I spoke about. now imagine some really nice looking graphics spreading across the monitor but at the same tme filling the needs for those with a smaller viewing screen.

I hope this helps out a bit.

Hey all,

What's a good width to use IF you've already decided to use a fixed width theme?

I've read that some people try to choose pixel widths that are divisible by a lot of different numbers so as to easily figure out image widths, etc.

Thanks,

Greg

780 is always a good start. See what you think and then if you feel like you should go wider then make the changes. If you feel the site is just too narrow.

These are a good start...

http://developer.yahoo.com/yui/grids/

Tony