fixed vs fluid, really that much extra work?

User

Well-known member
I read somewhere, probably on here, that someone was saying that part of the increased cost of the style is to create a fluid or fixed style in addition to the respective other one. My question is; Is it really a lot of extra work to create one of the other once the style as such is already created? I mean are we talking an extra hour, or 10 hours, or 40 or what?
 
I read somewhere, probably on here, that someone was saying that part of the increased cost of the style is to create a fluid or fixed style in addition to the respective other one. My question is; Is it really a lot of extra work to create one of the other once the style as such is already created? I mean are we talking an extra hour, or 10 hours, or 40 or what?
Unless its something similar to what Vodkaholic did where the style would look off due to being fluid (the category images) theres no reason you can't do a fluid width in a few seconds.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kim
Generally speaking, fixed style needs more work to become fluid. Because a lot of elements are created to be at a specific size.

for example, a simple box.

fixed = you can just have 1 image of a box. done

fluid = depending on the design, you might need up to 3 images for a fluid box. The left side, the middle, and the right side. With the middle being repeatable. If it's not created in the beginning with fluid in mind, it can be a lot of work later.

Some can be simple... you know, <div> with css border and a repeatable background image will scale without much work.
 
I read somewhere, probably on here, that someone was saying that part of the increased cost of the style is to create a fluid or fixed style in addition to the respective other one. My question is; Is it really a lot of extra work to create one of the other once the style as such is already created? I mean are we talking an extra hour, or 10 hours, or 40 or what?
Any style will take ages unless you don't care and want a very quick one


Unless its something similar to what Vodkaholic did where the style would look off due to being fluid (the category images) theres no reason you can't do a fluid width in a few seconds.
What do you mean mate? I don't understand that post *scratches head*
 
I read somewhere, probably on here, that someone was saying that part of the increased cost of the style is to create a fluid or fixed style in addition to the respective other one. My question is; Is it really a lot of extra work to create one of the other once the style as such is already created? I mean are we talking an extra hour, or 10 hours, or 40 or what?

It all depends. The factors you have to consider are prity much endless if you've created the initial style (which will be either fluid or fixed) from the get go (unless you've designed it on a source image). I could create a fluid style and have it converted into a fixed style within an hour or two (could be in minutes) depends on the design, whether you've specifically sliced it for fluid then it'll take longer.Then you have to factor in the code that's in use, sometimes you may not need to adjust any code, there may be times where you have to adjust tons of code, imagery, custom graphic interfaces it really all depends.

My nature calls style take for example is a fixed width though I could easily have this converted to a fluid solution by re-slicing some imagery in about 30-40 minutes because of one fixed image.

It all depends, speed of the developer, graphics that need converted, sliced and re-coded there's just too many factors to consider to set an exact time. That said, it could be a matter of just changing % for px
 
Thanks for the feedback, I just wanted to get a better understanding of what's involved so that I don't have a WTF moment when I expected the change from fluid to fixed to take a couple hours and it actually takes a full week or some such. If I am hearing this right then the key to have a low effort conversion from fluid to fixed is to mostly rely on CSS and not an image heavy design for the fluid style (or the fixed style, or both, you know what I mean). For example the XF default style would make it easy to convert to fixed once fluid was created.
 
But which style do users usually prefer? A fixed or fluid one?
That really depends on your design. I had one design back in VB where it needed to be fixed because the background image had a gap in it x amount of pixels apart. Just perfect for the forum to nest into.
Many users prefer fluid, so that it doesn't matter if they are viewing it on a 860x480 or 1926x1600 the style will still look good. Anymore, websites are designed for resolutions of at least 1280x720.
 
AS has already been said.. if your design is initially Fluid, making it fixed is micro seconds work... if however it has been designed as Fixed with fixed images, then it can be a lot of work to go from Fixed to Fluid.

One reason I never design fixed width.. I design always to be fluid, if someone wants to make one of my styles fixed width, they are welcome to do so.
 
Top Bottom