Advice pls on content width vs screen res

[ALiepinieks]

hi all,

this little problem has cropped up for me once before, and i received some criticism from the community and several others i know for the path i eventually chose.

in a nutshell, i've established a new business doing (amongst other things) web development, and have now encountered a second client who wishes to develop their site to suit a screen resolution that is larger than i agree with.

the first time i came across this i was quite accomodating, and although i argued, i succumbed pretty quickly to their wishes as after all, i needed the money and they were informed (albeit still a little ignorant). the site was eventually built to suit to a minimum screen res of 1280px wide.

the criticism i received was centred more around how this reflects on me, and how "irresponsible" it might be considered, however this new client has now dictated 1366px wide (???) as their minimum, with the only other alternative being a zen-cart site that uses 'fluid widths'.

i have begun arguments, and suspect they feel it will promote sales (they sell computer parts, and i think they're hoping it will sell monitors).

i would like to know however what anyone thinks of this, and whether or not i should be shot for agreeing, shot for losing the work if i dig my heels in, and what standards are presently used as we move further down the technological road.

ps: the option of 'fluid widths' will most certainly increase the time for the project significantly due to the number of layout customisations, and i really cannot see it working (although it may still be a better option!).

nb: while i am not new to development, i am new to self employment, so any comments welcomed : ) apologies in advance if this is not the type of question to post on this forum, but it was easier to ask than to ask if the question was ok !

cheers
andrejs

[RodG]

hi all,

Group responds with "Hi ALiepinieks"

this little problem has cropped up for me once before, and i received some criticism from the community and several others i know for the path i eventually chose.

And we still say that buying penile ################ cream over the internet is a bad idea.

in a nutshell, i've established a new business doing (amongst other things) web development, and have now encountered a second client who wishes to develop their site to suit a screen resolution that is larger than i agree with.

Dissagreeing with a client is a good way to lose a client. Your job is to advice and recommend.

the first time i came across this i was quite accomodating, and although i argued, i succumbed pretty quickly to their wishes as after all, i needed the money and they were informed (albeit still a little ignorant). the site was eventually built to suit to a minimum screen res of 1280px wide.

You gave the client what they specified. I see nothing wrong with that.

the criticism i received was centred more around how this reflects on me, and how "irresponsible" it might be considered,

The important question is how do *YOU* feel about the path you took? As long as you did nothing immoral, illegal or unethical then it really isn't anyone else's business, and if it did involve any of the above, then it is you that has to live with any consequences.

i have begun arguments,

Well, quit it, before you get branded as some sort of diva.

and suspect they feel it will promote sales (they sell computer parts, and i think they're hoping it will sell monitors).

And you think you know their market better than they do? They do actually have a good point ... whether it'll work or not from a sales perspective is yet to be seen, but it seems that they are trying to be 'different' from the rest, and who knows they may be they type of company that likes to change tack every few months or so, and this will be great for you... all those paid updates .... all you need to do is respond according to their needs and they'll keep you on board.. argue with them and they'll go elsewhere. By all means if you really believe they are going to be doing something that you can help prevent that will harm sales, then by all means bring it to their attention, else just enjoy the ride....

i would like to know however what anyone thinks of this, and whether or not i should be shot for agreeing, shot for losing the work if i dig my heels in, and what standards are presently used as we move further down the technological road.

You should be shot for not realising what a golden opportunity you may be missing with this client.

ps: the option of 'fluid widths' will most certainly increase the time

This is probably the route I'd have gone for the first time (without arguing with the client) ... simply design the page/site to the requirements specified by the client, but make it re-sizable for alternate screen resolutions. Keep everyone (mostly) happy.

Cheers
Rod.

[schoolboy]

All of us who build sites for a living encounter clients with ridiculous and ill-informed requests. In my experience, 99% of the companies I build sites for have no understanding or appreciation of the over-riding importance of RELIABLE FUNCTIONALITY, in preference to COSMETIC DESIGN.

Clients agonise for hours (days sometimes), over a particular shade of purple to use, but pay scant attention to correctly formatted shipping calculation. When I show them that the shade they require will render differently on different monitors, they want to know how I can adjust it so ALL monitors see the same shade!

At this point I suggest they hire a team of "screen resolutionists" that travel around the world to visit every computer user to adjust resolution, hue and brightness on the planet's estimated 2 billion computer screens, and then these people must "weld" the settings buttons so the user cannot adjust them. I also propose that I would be happy to undertake this task (worldwide) for the very cheap price of a dime a screen.

I also tell them that the MOST IMPORTANT consideration is what the CUSTOMERS will want - not what the CLIENT wants, and that everything on the site must be made to encourage and stimulate sales.

If they don't want to heed the advice, I make sure my recommendations are in writing, so when they see dismal sales because of abandoned carts, they can't blame me for poor execution.

[ALiepinieks]

...and then these people must "weld" the settings buttons...

that's funny, i like it.

...and you think you know their market better than they do?...

well maybe, but that might turn into a long story, so lets focus on what is important. i feel that knowing their market is somewhat irrelevant (in this case), as we're not talking about someone selling 30 inch monitors to graphic artists who already have a 21 inch monitor. we're talking about a (dirt) cheap computer parts store, who simply wants a facelift to an already successful online business. their biggest drawcard is price of product, which means volume is necessary to maintain cash flow and justify their online existence. alienating 24% of the existing visitors who run a resolution of 1024 wide or less is really shooting yourself in the foot, but i know you had no way of knowing that. (blah blah blah - how did i get here?).

...They do actually have a good point...

do they? if i was to build a clothing store catering for size 8's, and made the entry to the store so narrow (because i thought it looked good or saved space, or whatever) that nobody except a size 8 could get in the door, would i increase sales or lose sales? would the aesthetic overrid the obvious to the minority who might still wish to purchase? would it really empower those who couldn't get in easily to buy from me? would they yell from the doorway or simply walk away? this crude analogy, i feel is what i am faced with (although mine is a little more melodramatic!)

...not realising what a golden opportunity...

i assume you mean the opportunity of doing it and then fixing it for even more money? i do like that in principle, but wouldn't admit it publicly!

...I make sure my recommendations are in writing...

well, interesting part is this is a decent size job. myob integration, additional service databases, a significant amount of branding etc. i therefore quoted 'elaborately', with an 8 page project outline (that's elaborate for me!) including definition of scope, project timeline and all sorts of gizmos to impress them : )

after looking at google analytics on the existing site, it was clear the aforementioned 24% were too much to ignore, so the "project manager" on their side signed off on the 1024 wide design specification and off we went.

it's only now that his boss is putting his 2c worth in (happens to be the owner, what can you do?) and i'm questioning whether to stick to the plan, charge more, argue until i'm blue in the teeth or whatever else might be available to me.

i suppose this post was initially written out of frustration. i cannot ask somebody to answer my dillemma, but figured any feedback is good feedback so persisted aksing anyway. appreciate the comments and suppose i will swallow my prode (yet again) and persist with yet another site that i cannot show my parents as they simply won't see it on their humble 17 inch dinosaur...

cheers
andy

[schoolboy]

Analytical tools (such as webtrends) will give data on users' browsers and resolutions.

Give the client what he wants (he who pays the piper calls the tune) but track the users' browsers and screen resolutions.

The results (over a few months) will point to the route you should then take...

[ALiepinieks]

i guess it's time to start singing then?

re: Webtrends, didn't know about it but saw this on wikipedia... ...Webtrends Analytics can require considerable resources and governance for web sites with high traffic....

these guys get around 60-70K visitors a month, which seems higher than average (to me anyway!). they're also very fickle about having "killer" graphics on the site, as their "brand" revolves around gaming, albeit this does not make up the majority of their customer base (???). hence i am trying to find a delicate balance between the killer graphics and decent performance, along with around 2-3K products.

in your experience, is webtrends bulky on the client side, or am i reading too much into this comment?

cheers
andy

[schoolboy]

I cite webtrends as an example... Your hosting account (for this site) may already have some in-built analytical tools (webalizer or similar) that can deliver these stats.

Webtrends is good, professional tracking software - but you may not need this level of granularity. (Also, the software / service isn't cheap).

Some time ago - faced with stupid clients - I invented a phrase I call the "Mouse-action Efficiency Factor". (MEF)

A website's MEF is simply a "count" of the number of mouse actions a user must perform in order to get to the resource (or end result) that they are after.

I tell my clients that their competitors are just a "mouse-click away", and if their (competitor's) MEF is better that theirs (the client), chances are that the visitor will use the competitor.

For example... If my client's website requires THREE mouse-actions to get to a result that is possible with TWO mouse-actions on the competitor's site, then my client's site is 33% LESS EFFICIENT!

Now... apply this concept to YOUR client...

Visitors to a site with resolution 1366, viewed on a browser with screen-res any lower, will FORCE horizontal scroll bars. In addition to ADDING to the MEF considerably, most people absolutely hate horizontal scroll-bars because they must now scroll vertically AND horizontally. This can add SEVERAL mouse actions to each new screen.

So, whereas a competitor (on even a 800px width) still has a MEF of 2 or 3 , your client's site is now a whopping 8 or 10, or possibly even 12 ! 400% to 600% LESS EFFICIENT - translated into a site that is SIX TIMES less likely to attract and keep customers.

If this silly design insistence is more important to the boss than getting sales, then let him make the damned site as wide as he f&%$%ing pleases!

[ALiepinieks]

fair call.

love the acronym, just a shame Marine Expeditionary Force has already stolen it : (

ps: i don't think anything's more important than sales to a business owner, it's just unfortunate that occasionally they confuse their goals with their desires.

[RodG]

so lets focus on what is important. i feel that knowing their market is somewhat irrelevant (in this case),

<snip>

alienating 24% of the existing visitors who run a resolution of 1024 wide or less is really shooting yourself in the foot, but i know you had no way of knowing that. (blah blah blah - how did i get here?).

You was stating how irrelevant you thought it was by expressing how important it was, to you

..... but what if by inconveniencing that 24% by making them scroll to see the entire screen, the really good priced widescreen monitors start to look even more attractive? ... Sales increase :-) (Hey, I'm just playing devils advocate here). As you say, this is irrelevant. Or is it?

do they? if i was to build a clothing store catering for size 8's, and made the entry to the store so narrow (because i thought it looked good or saved space, or whatever) that nobody except a size 8 could get in the door, would i increase sales or lose sales?

That's a pretty poor analogy (besides, haven't you ever seen "Black Books" ? The wide screen specification doesn't exclude those with lesser capabilities, it just means it won't be seen "as designed" unless they do have suitable equipment (and if you don't, here's a good quality monitor at a great price... blah, blah... ).

would the aesthetic override the obvious

I'll treat this as a rhetorical question.

i assume you mean the opportunity of doing it and then fixing it for even more money? i do like that in principle, but wouldn't admit it publicly!

There is a BIG difference between doing it *wrong* and then asking more money to fix it and doing it according to customers specifications even though you have warned of the possible dangers of using those specifications, and THEN charging additional fees to correct a problem that they were responsible for.

As schoolboy said,......................
"If they don't want to heed the advice, I make sure my recommendations are in writing, so when they see dismal sales because of abandoned carts, they can't blame me for poor execution."

it's only now that his boss is putting his 2c worth in (happens to be the owner, what can you do?) and i'm questioning whether to stick to the plan, charge more, argue until i'm blue in the teeth or whatever else might be available to me.

I think 'discussion' would be more productive than 'arguing'.

Questions: (rhetorical)
1. Stick to *who's* plan ? Yours, the project manager, or the owner?
2. Who signed off on the plan?
3. Who signed off on any changes to the plan?
4. Who signs the checks?
5. How much are you willing to negotiate your price to satisfy the change in requirements?

i suppose this post was initially written out of frustration. i cannot ask somebody to answer my dillemma,

We can give opinions though, and these can vary greatly, or be unanimous.

i will swallow my prode (yet again) and persist with yet another site

If you meant 'swallow your pride', yes, you should do that. Your client is not hiring you for your pride, they are hiring you for your skills in web development/design. You can (and should) make suggestions, and warn of any possible problems (document them where possible), but the end decision is still for your client to make, and you really shouldn't 'second guess' their reasons.

that i cannot show my parents as they simply won't see it on their humble 17 inch dinosaur...

Sorry, but if I were your client, I'd be telling you that you've just blown your 'argument' and possibly even the job. I'm sitting here thinking "this guy doesn't care about me or my business at all, he's just looking to impress his parents".


If you wish to be successfully self employed, you need to get a few priorities in order. Protect yourself, protect your family, protect your clients.

If you really want to impress you parents, just show them the $million check from the government for that secret project you worked on, but can't show them the website because it'll compromise national security.

Cheers
Rod

ps. Again, many of my comments are 'devils advocate'. Although I wrote them I don't necessarily agree with all what I wrote.

[ALiepinieks]

...You was stating how irrelevant you thought it was by expressing how important it was, to you...

more of a commentary on how much i've had to drink tonight. i don't even know why i wrote that?

...The wide screen specification doesn't exclude those with lesser capabilities...

my apologies, they're also insisting on no horizontal scrollbar. was going to mention this when schoolboy commented before, but didn't seem worth the debate at the time.

all good feedback guys, although i don't know if i'm going to be more or less stubborn when i speak with them again.

i guess i was hoping for someone to give me the green light to say , and then i could be rid of this job before it turns into a lemon!

cheers
andy