Which web design is better?

[hurray]

I have seen two different kinds of web-design or templates. One that stretches all the way from side to side on your screen, and one that leaves couple of inches off on each side.
Do you know which one is better? I can see one benefit of the first design, and that is, you can fit in more contents. But there seems to be more websites following second design. And why is that?

Hurray

 

[JMCDesigner]

Personal taste I think mostly. I'm not sure there's any real advantage in one or the other. Or do you mean the first one is stretchy and the second one is fixed width? With the first I guess you have to be more aware of how your page would look if stretched out really wide or squashed thin. I personally don't like working with percentage widths, things can get messy!

 

[hurray]

I wonder why most of the web-designers especially of very popular sites like bbc and cnn use fixed width. There must be some kind of advantage of this kind of design than the one that stretches from one side to another. Besides if one chooses to have his site fixed width, I wonder what is the ideal width as it really seems to vary.

 

[PixelPusher]

Being that most monitors support a 1024 x 768 resolution, a width of 960px tends to be a widely acceptable choice. This width still provides ample space for the browser frame and scroll bars.

 

[jillhandley]

Leaving a couple of inches off is getting more and more popular. Looks better in my opinion

 

[Fluffwump]

Well the way I see it is ... you can either go for fixed width or stretchy , the problem with stretchy is that you lose control of exactly where items are displayed on your website, but the pros are that it will accurately fill any size monitor.

If you choose fixed width it is best to choose a width that will fit most monitor sizes without the need to scroll everywhere, pros you have total control over content, cons some monitors will have a band either side.
It is purely a matter of choice, personally I go down the fixed width route and choose a page width of around 800 pixels, but to me control of the layout is extremely important.

If you want to get even more complicated I believe it is possible to design your website to detect your visitors monitor size and show them your most appropriate page design, however that involves a lot more work and quite frankly I can't be bothered with that.

I am using dreamweaver CS4 and found the missing manual books to be most helpful in learning the software.

Hope this helps.

 

[darrenfox]

Once IE6 finally dies, min/max width features can be used more which will allow you to do something in-between. Otherwise, I prefer fixed width. When you bust out the widescreen fluid websites can be pretty scary.

 

[brpcraig]

I prefer fixed with for content oriented sites. When the client is looking for a more artistic look I will occasionally go fluid with the design. All personal preference though, no huge advantages to either.