<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: 21.5% of web visitors still want you to design for 800&#215;600&#8230;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://twopointoh.co.uk/2007/01/19/215-of-web-visitors-still-want-you-to-design-for-800x600/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://twopointoh.co.uk/2007/01/19/215-of-web-visitors-still-want-you-to-design-for-800x600/</link>
	<description>Paul Lomax used to blog about Web 2.0, now he just tweets and shares content...</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 31 Jan 2012 06:10:05 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: paullomax</title>
		<link>http://twopointoh.co.uk/2007/01/19/215-of-web-visitors-still-want-you-to-design-for-800x600/#comment-4</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[paullomax]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 19 Jan 2007 13:37:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://twopointoh.wordpress.com/2007/01/19/215-of-web-visitors-still-want-you-to-design-for-800x600/#comment-4</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hi Deon,

At 1440x900 they will indeed render the same - that&#039;s a pretty wide resolution. Try changing your resolution to 1024x768 and opening your sidebar and you&#039;ll see what i mean (or check the screengrabs)

1024x768 does appear to be the de-facto standard for desktop &lt;b&gt;resolutions&lt;/b&gt;, finally. But so many people have their sidebars open, as far as a website is concerned they only have 800 for their browser &lt;b&gt;window width&lt;/b&gt;.

Web developers &lt;i&gt;should&lt;/i&gt; take advantage of new technology. But they should also ensure graceful degradation if they don&#039;t want to piss off 20% of their visitors. Same reason you should make sure your site works on IE6, IE7 and Firefox for example... 

Check out the link to the wikipedia article on Progressive Enhancement.

Cheers

Paul]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Deon,</p>
<p>At 1440&#215;900 they will indeed render the same &#8211; that&#8217;s a pretty wide resolution. Try changing your resolution to 1024&#215;768 and opening your sidebar and you&#8217;ll see what i mean (or check the screengrabs)</p>
<p>1024&#215;768 does appear to be the de-facto standard for desktop <b>resolutions</b>, finally. But so many people have their sidebars open, as far as a website is concerned they only have 800 for their browser <b>window width</b>.</p>
<p>Web developers <i>should</i> take advantage of new technology. But they should also ensure graceful degradation if they don&#8217;t want to piss off 20% of their visitors. Same reason you should make sure your site works on IE6, IE7 and Firefox for example&#8230; </p>
<p>Check out the link to the wikipedia article on Progressive Enhancement.</p>
<p>Cheers</p>
<p>Paul</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Deon</title>
		<link>http://twopointoh.co.uk/2007/01/19/215-of-web-visitors-still-want-you-to-design-for-800x600/#comment-3</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Deon]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 19 Jan 2007 13:32:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://twopointoh.wordpress.com/2007/01/19/215-of-web-visitors-still-want-you-to-design-for-800x600/#comment-3</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#039;m running at 1440 x 900 and both the example web sites you have pictures of render exactly the same. My point is basically the following :
Why should web design not move to 1024 as a de-facto standard?
Do desktop software development companies still build software that is compatible with a Pentium I with 64MB ram and a 16MB video card?

If software development continually takes advantage of the inevitable hardware and display options available to users should web developers not do the same ?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m running at 1440 x 900 and both the example web sites you have pictures of render exactly the same. My point is basically the following :<br />
Why should web design not move to 1024 as a de-facto standard?<br />
Do desktop software development companies still build software that is compatible with a Pentium I with 64MB ram and a 16MB video card?</p>
<p>If software development continually takes advantage of the inevitable hardware and display options available to users should web developers not do the same ?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

