Certain site layout better for advertising?

**deronsizemore** · 10-10-2005, 08:04 PM

I am a fan of the conventional two column layout with a header and footer. One column is the navigation and the other is the content.

Is there a certain layout that you feel suits having advertisements better then another? Like would a three column layout be better then a two or visa versa? Any other layout that normally works well?

**thebillionaire** · 10-10-2005, 09:12 PM

well 2 colums can sometimes look clustered if it under the 800x600 view

**ozgression** · 10-10-2005, 10:35 PM

A three column layout would allow you to put a skyscraper in one of the columns, but I think two columns look better.

**deronsizemore** · 10-10-2005, 10:45 PM

Yeah, that is kinda my delima (sp?). I like the two colun layout better because I fee it looks nicer and usually not as jumbled together as most three column layouts, but there is less space for ads. Three column layouts definitely provide more room for ads, but sometimes more ads/content scares people away from using the site. Most people want it simple and they want to be able to find what their looking for fast and easy.

**Shockt** · 10-10-2005, 11:40 PM

Seeing as most new computers now default to 1024x768 or greater resolution, I think it is time to drop developing for 800x600 and lower.

**r2d2** · 10-10-2005, 11:56 PM

I would go with two columns and integrate ads into your content and left nav columns, rather than put them in a column on their own.

If you look at the Google heat map, you can see stuff on the right is mostly ignored. Integrating the ads right into the content is much better.

I think the 800x600 vs 1024 debate depends a lot on the content of your site - if you have a photoshop site, you can be pretty sure people arent going to be using 800x600, but if its a general site or one that the less computer savvy people will be using, I think theres a good 15 or 20% (?) still using 800x600.

**Blue Cat Buxton** · 10-11-2005, 01:16 AM

If the right hand column is 'ignored' is there an argument for putting your site wide navigation links there - They will be looking for them so you are just forcing people to find them - leaving the 'hotter' left side for adverts that are then picked up naturally?

Just a thought, I haven't tested it

**r2d2** · 10-11-2005, 09:30 AM

Thats a very interesting idea Blue Cat - I wonder if anyone has tried it?

**Masetek** · 10-11-2005, 09:42 AM

There are still a lot of ppl using 800x600, easily more than around 25% according to stats I have seen. I would love to design all my sites for 1024, but 25% is still a big slice of visitors.

As for ads, from my experience intergrating ads into the content seems to get more clicks, especially if you integrate them well color wise. Set up channels for different ads in adsense and see what sorta results you get.

With the right side column, put something else in there with the skyscraper that looks kinda similar. For example, I put top searches in the right side column at the top and google at the bottom. I make my top search links the same color as the google ad and have a small description under each top search link, to blend in with the google ads.

As far as layouts are concerned, I like the 3 col but it's only really good for 1024 or over. So Im stickin with the good ol 2 col for most of my sites.

**Cutter** · 10-11-2005, 10:41 AM

I have one site with my navigation on the right side and adsense on the left. It works out pretty well.

If you use php inserts for your columns, it would be very easy to swap the right and left sides to see what works best.

**Billyray** · 10-11-2005, 01:56 PM

I'm a fan of three columns because like you say, 1 for the menu, 1 for content and 1 for ads but you could always test to see which works best. I like placing ads in the right hand column which as r2d2 has said most people ignore because I don't like annoying viewers - in other words the ads are on the page but less confronting (annoying) than being in the middle of the page. It probably doesn't convert as well but it still does fairly well.

dpmmedia my stats for 800x600 have never come close to 25% more like 5%. Although one of my sites is configured for 800x600 it looks embarrassingly skinny on 1280x1024 (29%) and absolutely anorexic on 1600x1200 (4%). [other 1152x864 (11%), 1024x768 (36%) unknown (8%)]

**paul** · 10-11-2005, 02:12 PM

I have a site with "how to" advice and for the last year 32% of the visits were from people at 800 x 600. I think it must depend very much on the subject of the site.

**Billyray** · 10-11-2005, 04:04 PM

Let me guess it's a "how to" site on how to change your screen resolution from 800x600... just kidding.

Yeah the site I quoted probably has a very high % of tech heads which would explain the discrepancy. Thanks Paul I was convinced 800x600 was a dying resolution.

**Masetek** · 10-11-2005, 06:02 PM

I got my stats from here . Bear in mind this is a w3 site, so it's visitors would be developers etc so this is an unusually high 800x600 figure for developers. My stats are around the 30% mark give or take

**Doug** · 10-11-2005, 09:59 PM

I had a three column layout on Strange Facts with google skyscrapers on the right but when I moved the ads to the top and bottom and went to two columns, it just didn't look right. I had to make that little insert because I just didn't like the way it looked. I eventually plan on moving my non website related links over there someday but spare time is a privelage that I unfortunately do not posses at the moment.