Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

New Website about Apple.com

it's quite a nice site but it seems a bit wide if the user was on 800x600 or 1024x768 there would be a lot of side ways scrolling
 
timmillwood said:
it's quite a nice site but it seems a bit wide if the user was on 800x600 or 1024x768 there would be a lot of side ways scrolling
Click to expand...

Had to make that choice. Apple's new site as of June 07 is about 1100px wide. But if they can do it...

Looks fine on 1280 which is anything in the last 3 years. Sorry to those on 1024, God help you if you're on 800. If your on 640... well done on getting that hunk of junk connected to the web...
 
I'm currently on 1024 (my parents computer) Lots of sideways scrolling.

The coverflow thing is very slow to scroll, may just be the 1.9Ghz P4 and 256 Ram on this computer though.

13th Janurary 2006 says iPod Video but has a screenshot of the introduction of intel.

Also wasn't there already another site out there with a large database of screnshots of apple.com. I'll try and find it.

Edit: found it. http://www.flickr.com/photos/kernelpanic/sets/283374/?page=4
 
Cleverboy said:
Good stuff. Always good to have more informational websites out there. You should think about killing the scroll bars in the top frame though... it looks a bit odd on my computer/Firefox with the extra scrollbars.

~ CB
Click to expand...
Will have a look at that. What res you running?
 
If you're not going to support 800x600, at least consider those using 1024x768.

Most of us are still using 15" or 17", 4:3 monitors, with resolution set to 1024x768. Some lucky ones may get widescreen monitors which has no problem with displaying browsers in wider window settings. But for most of us who are used to not using the whole screen, the page is too demanding.

Having scrollbars at the bottom of browser window is bad enough. Having one in the middle of the page (caused by top frame) is just too much.


-stndn.
 
stndn said:
If you're not going to support 800x600, at least consider those using 1024x768.

Most of us are still using 15" or 17", 4:3 monitors, with resolution set to 1024x768. Some lucky ones may get widescreen monitors which has no problem with displaying browsers in wider window settings. But for most of us who are used to not using the whole screen, the page is too demanding.

Having scrollbars at the bottom of browser window is bad enough. Having one in the middle of the page (caused by top frame) is just too much.


-stndn.
Click to expand...

This is the big issue with the design at the moment. From the Analytics of the page 10% of the viewers are on 1024, everything else is higher. With Apples latest pages being the full 1024 I don't think there is much option unfortunately. The site is going to be constantly updated with the latest pages, so in a years time you can look back at today's page. By then I think 1024 sites will be a thing of the past. Just going to have to move with the times I'm affraid.
 
Very nice site but no way will I participate in forums with white on black, just too hard to read.
 
I really enjoyed the site but have to be honest and say that my visit didn't last as long as I would have liked. The slowness of the cover-flow navigation made me leave... I am on an iMac G4 with 1GB of RAM.. I will revisit later on my MacBook.

Suggestion on the page size..
Selection from menu brings you to a layout with a scaled down view of the apple home page along with the information pertaining to changes and happenings. Then if someone needs to see the image of the home page larger they could click on it brining them either to 1. a new page, 2. a pop up (not my favorite idea, or 3. use something like LightBox to make the home page overlay the info.
 
robbieDrobot said:
This is the big issue with the design at the moment. From the Analytics of the page 10% of the viewers are on 1024, everything else is higher.
Click to expand...

Where are you getting this information? Is that based on some measurements you're taking on your own site? I ask because it doesn't seem to jive with what I've seen:

26% Higher
54% 1024x760
14% 800x600
0% 640x480
6% Unknown

Source.

Post Edit: "From the analytics of the page". I get it. Sorry.
 
Heavy Doody said:
Where are you getting this information? Is that based on some measurements you're taking on your own site? I ask because it doesn't seem to jive with what I've seen:

26% Higher
54% 1024x760
14% 800x600
0% 640x480
6% Unknown

Source.

Post Edit: "From the analytics of the page". I get it. Sorry.
Click to expand...

Here's the PIE chart from today. 1024 x 768 is the lowest of all the resolutions at 11%. Thank God for Google.
 

Attachments

  • screenres.jpg
    screenres.jpg
    34.8 KB · Views: 84
iReview!

I remember the days.

All that lovely hardware that helped Apple get back on track during the late 90s, early 00s.

Top effort.

The coverflow is silky smooth on my core duo 2GB RAM MacBook with Safari 3 beta.
 
robbieDrobot said:
Here's the PIE chart from today. 1024 x 768 is the lowest of all the resolutions at 11%. Thank God for Google.
Click to expand...

Is there a chance this is a new site and most (or all) of the traffic you're getting is people coming from here, and maybe other forums of Web designers (who are obviously more likely to have hi-res display?

Don't get me wrong. I hope these stats are indicative of your target market. Just making sure you're thinking it through.
 
Heavy Doody said:
Is there a chance this is a new site and most (or all) of the traffic you're getting is people coming from here, and maybe other forums of Web designers (who are obviously more likely to have hi-res display?

Don't get me wrong. I hope these stats are indicative of your target market. Just making sure you're thinking it through.
Click to expand...

I've since changed the top of the page to work within 1024. You only have to side scroll the bottom frame now which isn't as bad and the only thing your really missing is ads.

The site's been blogged all over the place now so it's not just designers. It would however only appeal to the hardcore Mac fans which probably explains the low percentage of 1024 displays.

Thanks for all your comments. The site has changed so much thanks to everyones input, for the better. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back