Loading Time

  • DavyDuke17
  • Graduate
  • Graduate
  • DavyDuke17
  • Posts: 166

Post 3+ Months Ago

I seemed to notice my site was loading pretty slow and I went to:

http://www.websiteoptimization.com/services/analyze/

to test out the speed of my site. It said that the times were -
14.4K - 181.17 seconds
28.8K - 92.49 seconds
33.6K - 79.82 seconds
56K - 49.41 seconds
ISDN 128K - 17.77 seconds
T1 1.44Mbps - 5.01 seconds

One of the notable things that was way over the suggested was:
IMAGES_SIZE - Warning! The total size of your images is 187243 bytes, which is over 30K. Consider optimizing your images for size, combining them, and replacing graphic rollovers with CSS.

Object type Size (bytes)
HTML: 35256
Images: 187243
Javascript: 6915
CSS: 925

Is this alot worse in the image size than other sites? I see alot of other sites that use alot more images than I do. For example MLB.com has 44 external images and I have 16. Yet there file size for images is just 46225 compared to my 187243. How can I help this?
  • Anonymous
  • Bot
  • No Avatar
  • Posts: ?
  • Loc: Ozzuland
  • Status: Online

Post 3+ Months Ago

  • SharkShark
  • Guru
  • Guru
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 1013
  • Loc: Living In Today

Post 3+ Months Ago

One thing you may want to do is save your images as JPEGs. That tends to reduce the file size. If your page is loading slow, try slicing the images up smaller that way it can load it up a piece at a time which tends to be much faster.
  • Vladdrac
  • Mastermind
  • Mastermind
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 2136
  • Loc: Louisville, Ky

Post 3+ Months Ago

or you could change the compression of those jpegs as well
  • rtm223
  • Mastermind
  • Mastermind
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 1855
  • Loc: Uk

Post 3+ Months Ago

Why just jpegs? Jpegs aren't going to save you any filesize with images that have text and block colour in them.

http://hotwired.lycos.com/webmonkey/99/15/index0a_page2.html?tw=design
learn to appreciate the graphical file compression methods and design your graphics with a particular graphics type in mind (I just produced a site that is a completely graphical layout - 30 something kB total size).

And try to never use letters in images if you can possibly help it. This will always bloat the filesize - no compression method deals with text well. I don't know how big that flash nav bar is - you could try to optimise that.
  • gsv2com
  • Professor
  • Professor
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 776
  • Loc: Nippon

Post 3+ Months Ago

As cool as the flash navbar looks, it usually best to use flash ONLY on parts of your website that are not absolutely essential to cruising your website.

Don't get me wrong, I think your navigation is about the coolest thing I've seen in a while.

But what would happen on a browser without flash support? They'd be stuck only able to browse off your top-nav!
  • rtm223
  • Mastermind
  • Mastermind
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 1855
  • Loc: Uk

Post 3+ Months Ago

Although off topic its always best to have a comprehensive set of text links if your main nav relies on other technology (javascript/flash). Especially if using flash as it gives a little helping hand to the search engines...

Thats the reason why a lot of sites have a big list of links at the very botom of the page. They aren't easy for the user and they don't look so pretty, but they are there for SE and people without support for the extra features.
  • rtm223
  • Mastermind
  • Mastermind
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 1855
  • Loc: Uk

Post 3+ Months Ago

BTW thank you for the link - I was looking for something like that a couple of days ago, no one replied to my thread :(
  • DavyDuke17
  • Graduate
  • Graduate
  • DavyDuke17
  • Posts: 166

Post 3+ Months Ago

I downloaded a free trial of Ulead Smart Saver Pro:
http://www.ulead.com/products/web_design.htm

and it really cut down the file size of my graphics by over 50% and my page loads much faster now - about 29 secs which I guess still isn't very good. The flash navbar is whats taking up time but I don't have my site in a template so it'd take forever to replace it on all of the pages. I don't know how I could go about cutting the file size of a flash file like someone mentioned before, if you could please elaborate on how I could do that. Thanks.
  • DavyDuke17
  • Graduate
  • Graduate
  • DavyDuke17
  • Posts: 166

Post 3+ Months Ago

Found this while looking up - they have a free trial too:
http://www.show-kit.com/flash-optimizer/

Maybe it'll be useful to someone else.
  • Vladdrac
  • Mastermind
  • Mastermind
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 2136
  • Loc: Louisville, Ky

Post 3+ Months Ago

Im not sure if you know this or not, but your tables are really bad in firefox here is a screenshot http://vladdracworld.com/web_images/baseball.png

not sure if this is before the change or not.

also it loaded superfast for me
  • rtm223
  • Mastermind
  • Mastermind
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 1855
  • Loc: Uk

Post 3+ Months Ago

I think you would probably be better off manually compressing the files - an optimiser will only go so far, especially with flash, as there are so many little tricks you can use for reducing filesize.

Strangely, firefox on windows displays it fine. I thought they were supposed to behave pretty much the same?
  • Vladdrac
  • Mastermind
  • Mastermind
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 2136
  • Loc: Louisville, Ky

Post 3+ Months Ago

hmmm, it appears not. That is strange....something to be aware of in the future.....definately

well.....anyone else seeing the same thing using firefox in linux?
  • DavyDuke17
  • Graduate
  • Graduate
  • DavyDuke17
  • Posts: 166

Post 3+ Months Ago

Wow, how could it possibly even look like that if its in tables, things are practically on top of eachother. Hopefully someone else can verify if it is messed up every firefox.
  • Vladdrac
  • Mastermind
  • Mastermind
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 2136
  • Loc: Louisville, Ky

Post 3+ Months Ago

well there are certain conflicts between different browsers, not necessarily an error on your part. It is something to be aware of and you should look at your site through different browsers when doing a site.

What bothers me is that rtm223's firefox is seeing it fine through windows, and I want to know if someone else using firefox on linux is seeing what I am seeing....before you jump to any conclussions.

I mean it is possible that it is something screwed up on my end, thats why I would like to know as much as you would
  • rtm223
  • Mastermind
  • Mastermind
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 1855
  • Loc: Uk

Post 3+ Months Ago

can you get your hands on a different gecko browser for linux vlad (I've knackered my linux partition now). It is bizarre that this is happening, but I would imagine it's it's a little bit of standards non-compliance.
  • Vladdrac
  • Mastermind
  • Mastermind
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 2136
  • Loc: Louisville, Ky

Post 3+ Months Ago

hmmm, looks fine in mozilla

Post Information

  • Total Posts in this topic: 16 posts
  • Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 34 guests
  • You cannot post new topics in this forum
  • You cannot reply to topics in this forum
  • You cannot edit your posts in this forum
  • You cannot delete your posts in this forum
  • You cannot post attachments in this forum
 
cron
 

© 1998-2014. Ozzu® is a registered trademark of Unmelted, LLC.