|
|
Web optimizers - any one use them
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Boston
Status:
Offline
|
|
I stumbled upon rage software's web crusher I decided to play with it but so far the results are not as much as I hopped. While my iweb site's size has been reduced 40% the speed hasn't really improved.
So this begs the question, does anyone use this, or anything similar? So far I'm less then impressed, but I'd like to know what other's think.
FWIW, I tested my iweb site, and a site I developed using rapidweaver. The rapidweaver site lost some of the formatting I setup and thus made it useless for me.
|
~Mike
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status:
Offline
|
|
There are many different techniques that can be utilized for improving website performance, but before you do any of this, it is wise to determine whether there are bottlenecks elsewhere such as with your web server. Where is your site hosted?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Boston
Status:
Offline
|
|
the intended purpose is for my iweb site, on mobileme
I know that explains a lot because mobileme/iweb can be a bit slow. Irregardless, I found that the "pre-crushed" site took 15 seconds to load the main photo album site and the "post-crushed" site took the same amount of time. I was hoping for a bit faster load times but I'm not seeing any.
|
~Mike
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status:
Offline
|
|
If your photo album is taking 15 seconds to load, a tool like this is not going to help. Your best bet would be to compress the JPGs smaller (or use JPGs if you are using PNGs), but even then you will only be able to compress JPGs up to a point before you start to see artifacts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Boston
Status:
Offline
|
|
That's one of the functions of the web crusher, it reduced the size of the site from 61 meg to 37 meg and the main album page is just a series of thumbnails each pointing to a web gallery so even then the size of the images shouldn't be a factor in this case. I can see the main photo pages benefitting from compressing the images but overall the main album page wouldn't.
I suspect its poorly written/bloated javascript that's consuming the time and no amount of optimizations will help that. I cannot be sure which is why I posted this thread to see if others use this tool or others like it, especially if they use iweb.
|
~Mike
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status:
Offline
|
|
Why would you assume that the problem is with Javascript? Javascript is just text, but whether the images are preloaded or loaded on demand they still need to be loaded. It sounds like the only real way to improve upon the performance of your photo galleries is to change how they are designed and structured?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status:
Offline
|
|
Javascript is not "just text" any more than any other code is. Javascript is code that is parsed and compiled. More importantly, it's done synchronously — so if you have a bunch of it that needs to load before your page content, everything else has to sit there and wait its turn while the Javascript is downloaded and interpreted.
|
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Chuckit
Javascript is not "just text" any more than any other code is. Javascript is code that is parsed and compiled. More importantly, it's done synchronously — so if you have a bunch of it that needs to load before your page content, everything else has to sit there and wait its turn while the Javascript is downloaded and interpreted.
My answer was obviously a simplification, but obviously we can agree that the downloading and even interpreting of JS is not going to be a great bottleneck here. What might be is the rendering of content as faciliated by JS though...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Rules
|
|
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|