Seriously. I know im probably in the smaller market of 2560h res., but seeing this column in the middle of my screen is just wasteful. I can adjust the font size myself :) This is just for firefox though... opera is a different story entirely.
Same here, 2560, firefox. And no, I don't see text in the middle, I just resize the window for the best fit (around 1280). I'm into variable width, but it just gets TOO wide. Cut it back some. I mean I'd love it to be variable like in 1280 being widest possible. Thats half of my screen, perfect for browsing because no pages are wide enough not to fit in. And I can still put 2 pages side by side comfortably (product comparison).
With the 2560 resolution, I am used to resizing my width to a size that is comfortable for reading this site, or any other news site. and by reading , I mean loading up Google Reader and let me fingers to the walking!
Wider is better. :p I have a 22" LCD and its not nearly wide enough. You need to add another option to the poll that asks for even wider. Room is being wasted, I should be able to read the equivalent of two pages of print on this thing without having to scroll, but that is not the case. The less I have to scroll around the better.
Maybe I'm missing something here, but why can't this be an option as part of your profile settings or a special button/website address so that people can choose which style they prefer. Is it not possible to leave it variable width but provide a fixed-width option?
@Chris W, if it's THAT wide, then the actual article will only take up 25% leaving 75% of comments/ad/etc...so, my point is: why fill 75% of your screen with comments? ...they're all useless and "wasteful."
I "only" run at 1920x1200, but isn't the point of widescreen/high res monitors like this so we can have multiple windows open at once? I vote for 800 minimum and either a 1024 or 1280 max width. Il adjust the browser to 1024 so I can keep Engadget up and be working on another project with the rest of my available space.
I have to disagree with you. For me, the articles are the set-up and the witty comments are the punch line. I'd say a big fraction of all of the humor on the little e comes from the peanut gallery.
mmm... whilst I don't quite have the luxurious 2600h resolution, I am on a 24" 16:10 and it is terribly small as it is... Is there any other way to make it more variable, 2 articles beside each other maybe..?
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
rock99rock @ May 21st 2008 4:15PM
Seriously. I know im probably in the smaller market of 2560h res., but seeing this column in the middle of my screen is just wasteful. I can adjust the font size myself :) This is just for firefox though... opera is a different story entirely.
Shinigami @ May 21st 2008 4:39PM
Same here, 2560, firefox. And no, I don't see text in the middle, I just resize the window for the best fit (around 1280).
I'm into variable width, but it just gets TOO wide. Cut it back some.
I mean I'd love it to be variable like in 1280 being widest possible. Thats half of my screen, perfect for browsing because no pages are wide enough not to fit in. And I can still put 2 pages side by side comfortably (product comparison).
Yes, it looks horrible when it gets SUPER wide.
Kuipo @ May 21st 2008 5:02PM
"...because no pages are wide enough not to fit in."
I bed to differ:
http://worm.bluesfear.com/index.php?content=submissions&action=view
Eric @ May 21st 2008 5:02PM
With the 2560 resolution, I am used to resizing my width to a size that is comfortable for reading this site, or any other news site. and by reading , I mean loading up Google Reader and let me fingers to the walking!
Chris W @ May 21st 2008 5:18PM
Wider is better. :p
I have a 22" LCD and its not nearly wide enough. You need to add another option to the poll that asks for even wider. Room is being wasted, I should be able to read the equivalent of two pages of print on this thing without having to scroll, but that is not the case.
The less I have to scroll around the better.
mac404 @ May 21st 2008 5:20PM
Maybe I'm missing something here, but why can't this be an option as part of your profile settings or a special button/website address so that people can choose which style they prefer. Is it not possible to leave it variable width but provide a fixed-width option?
teej @ May 21st 2008 6:20PM
@Chris W,
if it's THAT wide, then the actual article will only take up 25% leaving 75% of comments/ad/etc...so, my point is: why fill 75% of your screen with comments? ...they're all useless and "wasteful."
Mr. E @ May 21st 2008 6:59PM
I "only" run at 1920x1200, but isn't the point of widescreen/high res monitors like this so we can have multiple windows open at once? I vote for 800 minimum and either a 1024 or 1280 max width. Il adjust the browser to 1024 so I can keep Engadget up and be working on another project with the rest of my available space.
low tech @ May 21st 2008 8:35PM
@teej
I have to disagree with you. For me, the articles are the set-up and the witty comments are the punch line. I'd say a big fraction of all of the humor on the little e comes from the peanut gallery.
MacMan @ May 26th 2008 8:22AM
mmm... whilst I don't quite have the luxurious 2600h resolution, I am on a 24" 16:10 and it is terribly small as it is...
Is there any other way to make it more variable, 2 articles beside each other maybe..?