Re: Browser maximum WIDTH & HEIGHT!

Walter Ian Kaye (
Wed, 20 Mar 1996 14:05:34 -0800

Message-Id: <v02120d04ad762deca018@[]>
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 1996 14:05:34 -0800
From: (Walter Ian Kaye)
Subject: Re: Browser maximum WIDTH & HEIGHT!

At 11:12p 03/20/96, Heikki Vesalainen wrote:
>There's a lot of pros and cons said about this subject, but
>I still want to say that the reason I started the discussion on
>this subject was that my background pictures look bad on screens
>wider than 800 pixels (by back ground pictures are 800 pixels wide), and
>I want some kind of solution to this (other than, "stop using back
>ground pictures, they are not real HTML").
>Just check them out on an screen wider than 800 pixels, the background
>pictures will "loop".
>(the address is

A few things:

1. If you make your background gif wider, say 1300 pixels wide, it will look
   as intended on monitors up to 1280x1024 regardless of window size.

2. Using the default window width in Netscape, about 3-4 cm of the text was
   obscured on the right-hand side. I had to click the zoom box in order to
   read the page. (My monitor is 832x624 -- 17" -- but I leave my windows set
   to the default, which has an imaging area of 472 pixels or so in width.)

3. Here are some Macintosh screen sizes:
     512 x 342 -- Plus, SE, Classic (9")
     512 x 384 -- Color Classic (10"), 12"
     640 x 400 -- Portable; early PowerBooks
     640 x 480 -- 13-15"
     640 x 870 -- Portrait
     832 x 624 -- 16-17"
    1024 x 768 -- 19"
    1152 x 870
    1280 x1024
   72 pixels-per-inch both horizontally and vertically is the Macintosh norm,
   and you can check your screen using a calibration gif I made -- go to my
   home page, click on the Viewing Notes button, and follow the link to the
   "screen test" page.


    Walter Ian Kaye <>     Programmer - Excel, AppleScript,
          Mountain View, CA                         ProTERM, FoxPro, HTML     Musician - Guitarist, Songwriter