OFPEC Forum

OFPEC The Editing Center => Comments & Suggestions => Topic started by: Baddo on 16 Feb 2007, 18:18:08

Title: Total size of data needed to download to show OFPEC frontpage
Post by: Baddo on 16 Feb 2007, 18:18:08
Hi friends,

I think OFPEC should significantly reduce the size/number of the images on the frontpage, and elsewhere where the same images are present. The website has felt sluggish on a 8 Mbit/s connection since its launch in the current design. I did a test on Fri Feb 16 10:47:18CST2007 for www.ofpec.com in http://www.websiteoptimization.com/services/analyze/ and that analyzer says the total size of data needed to download to represent the frontpage is a whopping 508141 bytes (496 kilobytes)! Don't you think that's a bit too much?

In addition, the website seemed to be more responsive when it was on hubba's server; when I request a page, it takes more time to start downloading the page than it did from hubba's server. This in addition to the quite big amount and size of the images makes this website feel, simply put, slow. My recommendation is to reduce the amount of images to minimum and seriously optimize the size of the images, as it currently seems that the images are quite big for no obvious reason.

Best Regards,
Baddo.
Title: Re: Total size of data needed to download to show OFPEC frontpage
Post by: bedges on 16 Feb 2007, 19:09:56
the site design is currently under review with this very issue in mind.

it should also be pointed out that our hosts have been experiencing difficulties over the last few weeks (and months...) thus sluggish delivery of pages can only be partly attributed to the graphical content.
Title: Re: Total size of data needed to download to show OFPEC frontpage
Post by: Baddo on 16 Feb 2007, 19:19:04
Hi

OK, it's good to know that you are having a look at it. One thing I noticed about the top banner graphics: this http://www.ofpec.com/templates/OFPEC/images/headers/current_header.jpg is placed on top of this http://www.ofpec.com/templates/OFPEC/images/header_frame.jpg. Can you not make the latter image much simpler and smaller in bytes because it is ought to be almost completely hidden under the former image?

Baddo