Pros and cons of different layout schemes

I tend to differ with you on this point. I very much prefer a left-aligned, fixed width site.

Go to any of the following sites:

http://www.cnn.com/
http://www.foxnews.com/
http://www.sun.com/
http://www.espn.com/
http://www.microsoft.com/
http://www.ibm.com/
http://www.sony.com/

They all have some things in common. They are all left-aligned, fixed-width sites. They all target 800 x 600 resolutions. These companies have put hundreds of thousands, if not millions of dollars into developing higly usable UI's. They haven't used this method because of an oversight.

In my opinion, left-aligned, fixed-width sites work well because the majority of their users are from the so-called "western world", where we all start reading from the top left hand corner and work our way to the right, until we get to the end of a line, at which point we go back to the left and start on the next line.

**********************

Client: My wife/friend/cousin/neighbor just pulled up the development site and they said there's a great deal of space on the right hand side that isn't being used.

Me: Have that person go to any of these sites(as listed above) and then call me back to discuss.

...later

Client: Wow! He/she/we/I never noticed that before.

Me: That was my point.

*******************


There are many advantages to developing a site this way. Absolute positioning, for me, is a huge advantage. Paragraphs that don't back-flow into a single line is something I consider important for readability. All browsers, regardless of OS, do a few things by default without exception - one of them is starting content in the top left corner.


**I just wanted to share these thoughts because the claim that a site should be liquid, or centered is a an argument I hear over and over again and I only ask that you consider an alternative view.


Thanks

I'm not so sure about the reasoning of the left-to-right reading, as you still get that with center-aligned and fluid.