Shop Forum More Submit  Join Login
73%
106 deviants said The second loads MUCH faster.
14%
20 deviants said The second loads faster.
8%
11 deviants said Both load fast. Nearly the same.
4%
6 deviants said The first one loads faster.
1%
2 deviants said They don't load. :| (HUH?)

Devious Comments

:iconsidetracked:
sidetracked Featured By Owner Jun 22, 2005  Hobbyist Photographer
HOLY CRAP! what a site!!
:worship:
Reply
:iconsheik17:
Sheik17 Featured By Owner May 26, 2005
the second one load really fast compare to the first one ^^
Reply
:iconcompli:
compli Featured By Owner May 19, 2005
well they've both been cached...so they both take a few miliseconds to load.
Reply
:iconegomednog:
Egomednog Featured By Owner May 19, 2005
Second
Reply
:iconhellspwn:
Hellspwn Featured By Owner May 19, 2005  Hobbyist Writer
Second loads faster, but not by much. Was done while the first was 3/4 done. ^^

Dyar! Fear my randomness!
Reply
:icon19-10:
19-10 Featured By Owner May 19, 2005
Well, the first one didn't do anything at all, but the second one loaded instantly
Reply
:iconmclaranium:
mclaranium Featured By Owner May 18, 2005
check also clicking fisrt the second -
the first link in LAST

maybe that influences -- just my imagination - give me more links to test please
Reply
:iconcentercore:
Centercore Featured By Owner May 18, 2005
second one is the first one on steriods very quick :D
Reply
:iconshockerteam3d:
shockerteam3d Featured By Owner May 18, 2005   Interface Designer
Whit my dial up both page loads as the same time :nod: if i pay atention more the second one load 4 seconds more fastest than the other "yoursite"

Any way the new features for your site are amazing i love the color picker icon is really really nice :w00t:
Reply
:iconkalany:
kalany Featured By Owner May 18, 2005
I'm on DSL -- I right-clicked on the first and then the second link to start them opening in new tabs so I could compare. The first one started faster, but the second one caught up and passed it and was downloaded in about 8 seconds. I gave the first one a minute and it hadn't fully loaded, although it was loaded enough for me to read most of the content.
Reply
:iconskizo:
skizo Featured By Owner May 18, 2005   Digital Artist
I took several tries, I didnt want to say bs.

First one needed averagely around 24 seconds.
Second one needed averagely around 14 seconds.

10 seconds different out of 24 total is kinda the 50%. It is REALLY faster.
No clue if it is your old one or your new one... but in this test it seems to be much faster.
Reply
:iconskizo:
skizo Featured By Owner May 18, 2005   Digital Artist
to be more precise: as I read back about the blazingly fast, I must say a few things.

1st - I'm on a 640kbps connection, so probably the 2nd one could load even faster than I feel.
2nd - It seemed to me that while the first gets shortly in contact with the browser in about 1 second and then needs 20 seconds to download everything, the second one needs some more seconds to contact (about 5 as I timed), and in 10 seconds downloads the whole image.

Timings may not be accurate, and this stuff could be useless aswell... but since you asked, im sayin :nod:
Reply
:iconcyberworker:
cyberworker Featured By Owner May 19, 2005
To account for the contact speed...

The first link is going to aw8.net, which is registered under a very good and efficient registrar. DNS resolution speed is great.
The second link is going to a .hk domain, which is registered and administered locally by HKIRC located in Hong Kong. DNS resolution speed is not as great.

So I guess that's the difference ... ;) and when aw8.net has switched to the new host, the contact speed issue should be gone.
Reply
:iconskizo:
skizo Featured By Owner May 19, 2005   Digital Artist
Yes, I know that. It's why I pointed it out :nod:
Reply
:iconniteangel:
niteangel Featured By Owner May 18, 2005
Indeed useful :D thanks!

That means in general the second one is still faster :nod: :hug:
Reply
:iconskizo:
skizo Featured By Owner May 19, 2005   Digital Artist
yeah. much faster :)
Reply
:iconmarcinxp:
marcinxp Featured By Owner May 18, 2005  Professional Digital Artist
Definately 2nd
Reply
:iconrougeux:
rougeux Featured By Owner May 18, 2005  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Second one was much faster for me. That's the kind of speed I like! :) Incidentally, I wanted to mention another thing in my last post but forgot until I looked at these test pages. Since I'm a Web developer, I like to look at the source code of various pages just to see if I might learn something new or it may be just for fun. I noticed on your site, you have a script running that disables the right click menu. Did you do this to help prevent others from stealing your work? It's not the best way if it is. Plus, it's a bit annoying to anyone else who has tools they might use in their right click menu. Also, there are plenty of ways to get around it.

I don't mean to poke and prod. Just wanted to mention. :)

Nick
Reply
:iconniteangel:
niteangel Featured By Owner May 18, 2005
:) Hehe, yeah, but that is only for some part of the site. But I will see what I can do. :nod:

The 2nd one is actually our new host. Yay!~
Reply
:iconunhingedmouse0:
UnhingedMouse0 Featured By Owner May 18, 2005
The second one was a whole lot faster. The first one took probably a little under a minute to load everything while the second one loaded in 7-10 seconds.
...and thats on a DSL connection. ;)
Reply
:iconikiza-evotion:
ikiza-evotion Featured By Owner May 18, 2005   Photographer
Fuck.

**loaded
Reply
:iconikiza-evotion:
ikiza-evotion Featured By Owner May 18, 2005   Photographer
Second one load way faster.
Reply
:iconvibralux:
Vibralux Featured By Owner May 18, 2005
The first doesn't even load. But the 2nd loaded right when I clicked it :D
Reply
:icongravymonkey:
gravymonkey Featured By Owner May 18, 2005
the 1st one didn't load at all. Are these pages built with Mozilla / Firefox in mind? I was pretty pleased the with 2nd one.
Reply
:iconivyc:
ivyc Featured By Owner May 18, 2005  Professional General Artist
The second one was MUCH MUCH MUCH MUCH Faster. I could have loaded 10 complete times from the second page in the time it would take to load 1/4 of the first. Seriously.
Reply
:icontrevor-gfx:
trevor-gfx Featured By Owner May 18, 2005
both are slow, first one even slower :)
Reply
:iconingenuousglow:
IngenuousGlow Featured By Owner May 18, 2005  Hobbyist General Artist
the first one took about 4-5 minutes to load, the second was instant, though, and i'm not claiming to know anything about websites, but if everything was already loaded from the first link, then wouldn't it make the second one go much faster?
Reply
:iconniteangel:
niteangel Featured By Owner May 18, 2005
nope. because they are different pages ;)
Reply
:iconstrukt:
strukt Featured By Owner May 18, 2005
2nd for sure m8 :)
Reply
:iconplasmax7:
PlasmaX7 Featured By Owner May 18, 2005
The second was about 10,000 times faster, nice job on speeding that up. ;)
Reply
:iconblaze2x:
Blaze2X Featured By Owner May 18, 2005  Professional Digital Artist
pop and it wsa there (second), boh are different aite right because else the first onewould still be in my cache memory and thuss the second one would load faster.

If they are different what is it that you changed I am really interested.
Reply
:iconhyperphuzion:
Hyperphuzion Featured By Owner May 18, 2005
He changed the server that the sites are located on.
Reply
:iconblaze2x:
Blaze2X Featured By Owner May 19, 2005  Professional Digital Artist
Thanks for letting me know
Reply
:icondjonasse:
DJonasse Featured By Owner May 18, 2005
second one loaded in about three seconds, as the first one took about six minutes.
Reply
:iconsora05:
Sora05 Featured By Owner May 18, 2005
The first one took ages to loading.
Reply
:iconnarfmaster:
Narfmaster Featured By Owner May 18, 2005  Professional Interface Designer
2nd one is WAY faster. Just powered it's way down the the images. :D
Reply
:iconnarfmaster:
Narfmaster Featured By Owner May 18, 2005  Professional Interface Designer
2nd one is WAY faster. Just powered it's way down the the images. :D
Reply
:iconnohbudy:
Nohbudy Featured By Owner May 18, 2005
The second smoked the first. The first, i quit after a short bit. Big diffrence between servers!
Reply
:iconoliverthomas:
OliverThomas Featured By Owner May 18, 2005   Photographer
I don't know what you did, and I'm a web designer of sorts too, but the second took about 2 seconds to fully load on my dsl connection in chicago, IL. The first one is still loading after 4 minutes.

What did you do? I was looking at the sources for each page, they look pretty similar...
Reply
:iconnohbudy:
Nohbudy Featured By Owner May 18, 2005
They are diffrent servers. Same everything but that.
Reply
:iconbjnorberg:
bjnorberg Featured By Owner May 18, 2005  Hobbyist General Artist
2nd loaded in about 5 seconds, however when the first had loaded for 4 minutes and still wasn't finished, I got really bored...
Reply
:iconcyberphobia:
cyberphobia Featured By Owner May 17, 2005  Professional Digital Artist
hm.. I dunno what's the technical difference, but the first was really hard to load - say, I'd down +- 15 megs in the time that the first was loading.. slow slow terribly slow.. and the second - was completely down in 2 seconds. that big difference that I thought it just loaded back from history.. well not, even with cleared all cache it was 2 sec.
Reply
:iconniteangel:
niteangel Featured By Owner May 18, 2005
the second - was completely down in 2 seconds
What is down? You mean offline?
Reply
:iconcyberphobia:
cyberphobia Featured By Owner May 18, 2005  Professional Digital Artist
eh.. sorry, bad english - I meant IT LOADED IN 2 SEC.
Reply
:iconniteangel:
niteangel Featured By Owner May 18, 2005
Yeah, now definitely we are going to the new fast server :nod:
Reply
:iconcyberphobia:
cyberphobia Featured By Owner May 18, 2005  Professional Digital Artist
that's good =)
Reply
:iconkei-th:
Kei-th Featured By Owner May 17, 2005
2nd was much faster the 1st didn't even load in 30 sec...
Reply
:iconbosniak:
bosniak Featured By Owner May 17, 2005
2nd if far speed !
Reply
:iconanywien:
Anywien Featured By Owner May 17, 2005
Well the second one was faster but then they both stopped.
Reply
Add a Comment:
 

Poll History