According to "any" logic, you should do a test with statistical relevance. Which means you need to to define your control. Otherwise you are pissing into the wind!
Again, this is conversion101 shit!
Case Study: How Display Size Can Affect Landing Page Performance
- Thread starter BenPOF
- Start date
According to "any" logic, you should do a test with statistical relevance. Which means you need to to define your control. Otherwise you are pissing into the wind!
Again, this is conversion101 shit!
What would be the control group in a test w/ different resolutions?! Define the control resolution for us.
I wonder why do you need a 1900 res lander... That defeats one of the main "directives" of a landing page - simplicity (graphically speaking).
Responsive design, or fit to screen has served me well.
But don't ask what is best or not Ben, that's the wrong approach. Test it! And test it again until you have consistent numbers to make a theory.
Otherwise you will most likely be making wrong assumptions (on A/B testing what I usually think isn't gona work, works, so I test every fucking thing, even with elements I dislike).
Responsive design, or fit to screen has served me well.
But don't ask what is best or not Ben, that's the wrong approach. Test it! And test it again until you have consistent numbers to make a theory.
Otherwise you will most likely be making wrong assumptions (on A/B testing what I usually think isn't gona work, works, so I test every fucking thing, even with elements I dislike).
The one with the most traffic volume for a specific landing page.
Of all the 3 resolutions, for me and as a typical viewer or visitor, the low-resolution gives me a professional and well done page and would really motivate me to see the details unlike with the 2 other resolution. So this perhaps explains why.
If you want accurate results, you would detect the resolution and test each independently. In your case, you would end up with 3 tests. That's the only way to say what affect the "size" of the ad is actually having on each resolution.
When you have a variable (resolution) that is changing constantly, it changes the test each time too.
In your test, it's not the "ad size" you are testing, you are testing a combination of things because you have multiple variables in play.
So all I need to do is force people to lower their screen resolutions when they visit my site and I'll get a much higher conversion rate?
Sounds good to me.
Sounds good to me.
How many of you would spend $ to test what the most common resolution is for demographics A, B, C, D etc. Let's be realistic here ladies and gents.
The only realistic way I could see this going down is if you used "fit to screen" as your default and tested it this way:
Fit to screen +40% size (need scrolling to see the whole thing)
Fit to screen +20% size (need minor scrolling)
Fit to screen default
Fit to screen -20% size
Fit to screen -40% size
What do y'all think?
The only realistic way I could see this going down is if you used "fit to screen" as your default and tested it this way:
Fit to screen +40% size (need scrolling to see the whole thing)
Fit to screen +20% size (need minor scrolling)
Fit to screen default
Fit to screen -20% size
Fit to screen -40% size
What do y'all think?
I think it's time for a split test between a responsive design and individual static resolutions.