# \[Rant\] Does the way OS X uses screen real-estate seem a little ridiculous to you...?

**URL:** <https://forum.kirupa.com/t/rant-does-the-way-os-x-uses-screen-real-estate-seem-a-little-ridiculous-to-you/258119>\
**Category:** random\
**Created:** [April 21, 2008, 5:39am UTC](https://forum.kirupa.com/t/rant-does-the-way-os-x-uses-screen-real-estate-seem-a-little-ridiculous-to-you/258119 "2008-04-21T05:39:11Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Anogar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ed655f/32.png) [@Anogar](https://forum.kirupa.com/u/Anogar)\
**Post date:** [April 21, 2008, 5:39am UTC](https://forum.kirupa.com/t/rant-does-the-way-os-x-uses-screen-real-estate-seem-a-little-ridiculous-to-you/258119/1 "2008-04-21T05:39:11Z")

</div>

On a standard Macbook - a 1280 x 800 screen resolution - web designers only have access to a minuscule **560px** - a full 240 pixels are taken by the default sized dock, the top bar, the default Firefox browser buttons, etc. So - part of this is Firefox’s fault, but the dock - by default - is just gigantic.

Eh. I’m just annoyed that I don’t get to have a full **30%** of the window. :wasted: