There's very little consensus on this topic; its not so much "which one is better" so much as "which one should I use in which scenario". The common hindering factor in creativity, is people relying mostly on downloaded web templates rather than custom designed websites.
Fixed layouts have the advantage of consistency. They can often be somewhat easier to develop, and you can often tweak them to look exactly the way you want them to. The downside, of course, is when a user's resolution is really large (or small, but small resolutions are a problem in fluid layouts as well) and he/she a lot of white space ( good example is CGIAR site). On text-heavy sites, you really need to make the reading area less wide for easier reading, which is where fixed is useful.
In certain cases, fluid layouts can be much more appropriate, but you still should keep things under control. Many sites now use a technique (i.e., the max-width CSS property) where the site is fluid up until a certain point; this is called an "elastic" layout, and is what most US universities sites uses.
A great example of a fluid site i've seen recently that fits each browser perfectly is the new John Lewis site, http://www.johnlewis.com
I will always advocate for fluid sites.
There's very little consensus on this topic; its not so much "which one is better" so much as "which one should I use in which scenario". The common hindering factor in creativity, is people relying mostly on downloaded web templates rather than custom designed websites.
Fixed layouts have the advantage of consistency. They can often be somewhat easier to develop, and you can often tweak them to look exactly the way you want them to. The downside, of course, is when a user's resolution is really large (or small, but small resolutions are a problem in fluid layouts as well) and he/she a lot of white space ( good example is CGIAR site). On text-heavy sites, you really need to make the reading area less wide for easier reading, which is where fixed is useful.
In certain cases, fluid layouts can be much more appropriate, but you still should keep things under control. Many sites now use a technique (i.e., the max-width CSS property) where the site is fluid up until a certain point; this is called an "elastic" layout, and is what most US universities sites uses.
A great example of a fluid site i've seen recently that fits each browser perfectly is the new John Lewis site, http://www.johnlewis.com
I will always advocate for fluid sites.
Fixed layouts have the advantage of consistency. They can often be somewhat easier to develop, and you can often tweak them to look exactly the way you want them to. The downside, of course, is when a user's resolution is really large (or small, but small resolutions are a problem in fluid layouts as well) and he/she a lot of white space ( good example is CGIAR site). On text-heavy sites, you really need to make the reading area less wide for easier reading, which is where fixed is useful.
In certain cases, fluid layouts can be much more appropriate, but you still should keep things under control. Many sites now use a technique (i.e., the max-width CSS property) where the site is fluid up until a certain point; this is called an "elastic" layout, and is what most US universities sites uses.
A great example of a fluid site i've seen recently that fits each browser perfectly is the new John Lewis site, http://www.johnlewis.com
I will always advocate for fluid sites.
Posts
