Really a fast page loads in under 3 seconds, Like 1 Mississippi, 2 Mississippi..that kinda thing. if it takes longer than that you might want to consider making a Aw8 lite version, with not so many graphics. The 3 second rule is a good way to test the speed of a site.
Hey there. It took an easy 10 minutes for the main page to load at http://www.aw8.net/aw-8.2/. The home page took about 3. For as long as I've known about the site it's always been quite slow like this. If you don't mind me asking, why does it take so long? It it the hosting service, size of files, or something else? I've always wondered a bit.
While it may not help drastically, something else will help some and certainly would not hurt a bit: Web standards and accessibility. Don't get me wrong, the site is gorgeous (I've always loved the look) but it would be a good idea to create a non flash version for those who don't have it installed or don't want to wait for a potentially long load. Also, while frames are handy to a point, they've been going by the wayside for a little while now and there are better alternatives.
As you can probably tell, I'm a big supporter of Web standards and everything related and I'd be more than happy to help out with any questions.
It took me about 10 or so minutes to load the page a week or more ago. I have DSL too. Maybe it's different now though. You hadn't officially stated it was up and running yet. You just put up a link in one of your journals and I clicked on it. ^_^
well... you know... sometimes it's very hard to stare at an everlasting loading page withouth sending it to f*** o**, but sometimes (very very VERY rare), it loads fine.
The web is nice, nobody says anything else, but... I think that it is a little too bloated. The first things I can come up with are:
1 - Compress the stuff a little better, because a 100kb less for every file will make, even though its few noticeable, will reduce SEVERALY the weight of the website itself.
2 - Find a faster and more reliable host.
3 - Maybe redesign the website a bit, removing images where they are not needed. Redundancy is not always a good thing.
4 - If you can, you should make the web server (if not already) compressing the pages with tar.gz compression. (it's a thing the provider should do, probably)
Sorry, I don't think the tips help except no. 2. Why?
You want me to redesign the site? That's stupid, because that is exactly why it was awarded! Compress what files? The zips? There are hardly any zips except some wallpapers while all the Flash movies are exported at the highest compression I can set in the Flash writer. For 4th suggestion, if everyone can do ir normally, why do I need to ask the server to compress pages? That is like doing too much.
And so I already took suggestion three. We are moving host this weekend, which loads instantly at least all over the US. It is an US host
ok, I must admit that I'm a little bit confused, anyway I'll try to explain what I meant:
1 - To compress the stuff a little better I meant, for instance, to export jpgs with a slightly bigger compression, that will probably make the difference invisible, still MUCH noticeable to the user who loads the page in terms of downloading times.
2 - I remember of the problems the server caused you. If the servers are too loaded (I mean on your website and all the others hosted at the same time by the same server) that can cause even your web to be displayed to others much much much slower. And possibly with way more problems than it should. I cannot go much deep in this discussion, as I have my own host which gave me kind of no problems, and is blazing fast aswell.
3 - By that I did not mean in any way to redesign the layout. I just thought for what I've seen, that putting for example images with solid colors as background is not much funny, when it could be done simply with something like "<tag bgcolor='#dunno'>". I just meant removing useless images replacing with html code. Of course that won't be possible everywhere, but everything helps imho. But maybe it's too much work and you dont want to do it (i'm lazy myself, now what i'm talkin about ) but then, you asked for opinions...
4 - web servers have the capability to compress runtime the files that have to be sent to browsers with a standard compression method. This means that if you have a normal text which weights 1MB it could be drastically compressed by the web server itself while sending it. Not all browsers support it, so for the few who do not they will still work as nothing happened. The ones who do support it (such as IE, Mozilla, Opera and most of the rest, Netscape included) will need less time to download it.
I here add one thing that I did not write in the other comment. If swf are not badly needed, don't use it. It can collapse everything. I mean they are useful, and all that, but sometimes using a good 'ol language, such as php, can avoid loads of swf to download uselessly, reduce the download timing and make the user happier.
Note: before you say anything I did not mean, I never said you have to remove all flash files in your web. Just think if some can be done in another way (such as plain html, for example), and if so, how much the difference will be.
Remember one thing: it's the sum which makes the total.
Second Note: after reading back what you wrote I though I would spend again some words about the 4. It works like this. You upload an html file (or anything else) of 1MB. The bowser do not support compression, it downloads 1MB of plain file. The browser DO support compression. It download the compressed version of that 1MB file. It's something that the web browser does instantly if enabled to. For any other questions about this, I guess that google can help
I've had it take about 10 minutes to load, Vince. No offence, but 10 minutes on the net is a l-o-n-g t-i-m-e.
It may look very pretty but it's just so overloaded. The music sidebar takes the longest to load.