What are the disadvantages of using “fluid borders” in web design?

Question

Until now I was using layout patterns with fixed arrangements, targeted for 1024-pixel width monitors. I think it's fixed to something like 980 pixels with some extra space on the left and right sides. Lately I was thinking about non-fixed solutions, where I can widen the frame to the width of the monitor. But there are also some very high monitor resolutions, which will make the page look too wide and too ugly. So it would be nice to set a maximum width as well and maybe minimum width too.

Firstly, what is it called when you don't use fixed layout? Is there a name for this?

Are there any disadvantages which I have to consider when going for this style?

I want to apply this style to a portal site, where I use a 3-column design with many boxes inside of each column.

Here are some notable "fluid" design examples:
http://addons.mozilla.org/
http://en.wikipedia.org/

Answer 1

I tend to call it "fixed width" or "fluid width" but "elastic" seems a popular term as well.

The cons are that getting a fluid/elastic design to look great on all monitors is tough, you mention larger monitors/resolutions, in my job I have to consider smaller monitors too.

Recommended reading:

http://www.alistapart.com/articles/elastic/

http://www.456bereastreet.com/archive/200504/fixed_or_fluid_width_elastic/

(the other articles on these sites are generally worth a read as well)

Answer 2

You will notice that the first example has got a limit. I often set a maximum width and then set alot of things inside that with percentage. So a sort of half way house if you like. It really depends on the site, what you wish to acheive and which screen res your users will use(available using market research)