Wasn't sure if I should do this here or in Tech Talk, but since it could be a bug I'll go with here.

When I go to any reviews, the page renders wider than the limit of my browser window, even if I maximize it. The font sizes don't appear any larger, it's just the content is too wide. I'm using Firefox, but tested it with IE also, with the same result. My resolution is 1024 x 768, and everything else adjusts to the browser just fine. Is it just me, or is anyone else having this problem?

Thanks for any advice and assistance!

It's not you. After the "upgrade", the PriceGrabber thing started showing up, and it's forced to a min width of 728. Add that to the left column (forced 170) and the right (forced 120), and you have 1018. Add a couple of pixels padding here and there and the vertical scollbar, and it passes your 1024 resolution. In the past (pre-PriceGrabber), the center panel was variable width, allowing for smaller resolutions. While I'm not sure I'd consider it a "bug", it is something that probably should be addressed. The left panel's pretty bulky as it is, and I don't think it would be too difficult to clean up the HTML in the center panel to more efficiently use padding and shave some pixels off that left panel to make it fit. I'm guessing somewhere around 26 pixels would do the trick. I suspect there's more than enough whitespace in the left panel alone as a quick-and-dirty solution.

das

Ah! I think I grasped most of that Thanks for the info!

Although I was just copying and pasting code I was given for the Pricegrabber thing, I can adjust the size of the table. I set it to 700 pixels wide -- let me know if that does the trick, and if not, if someone could give me a preferred width, I'll use that instead.

Thanks, <b>Adam</b>. I was just assuming you were forced to maintain that 728, but if it's flexible, that makes it easy (especially since it's extremely bloated). Anyway, it will probably depend on the browser, but at least on my end it looks like you need to trim another 4 pixels to 696.

das

I just checked and it looked great to me! And who says bitching don't pay?

696 it is!

*gasp* moving to Mature

Huh. I'm reading the review of Donnie Darko and realized that the size is back to being too wide again. Did the fixes get undone?

No. I trimmed the width another 20 pixels to 676, and that should do the trick.

I'm just guessing here, but it looks like it's the oversized cover art for <b>Ray</b> (the most popular review) that's doing it this time.

das