3 ms·

>Most .Net people I've interviewed think page load speed doesn't matter. Have you informed them that you work with a high traffic site? Most intranet sites are

>Most .Net people I've interviewed think page load speed doesn't matter. Have you informed them that you work with a high traffic site? Most intranet sites are not high traffic, so if they're spending time pre-optimizing for speed instead of features/development time, they're actually wasting the company's money. And what has viewstate got to do with SEO? You lost me. For SEO friendly URLs, all you need a is URL Rewriter. http://www.google.com/search?client=opera&rls=en&q=asp.net+url+rewriter&sourceid=opera&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&channel=suggest http://www.google.com/search?client=opera&rls=en&q=a... >only the people who knew internals of platform well could fix it That's true of any platform out there.

PonyGumbo 16y ago
In ASP.NET 4.0 and MVC, URL routing is built-in, and it's easy as pie.
sajidnizami 16y ago
Something like this: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1185984/is-viewstate-bad-for-seo http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1185984/is-viewstate-bad-... Yes I talk to them that we have a high traffic site and we lose them because they don't know about building them. Besides you won't find many Microsoft stack sites dealing with scaling issues. I personally looked up Stackoverflow scaling case studies to design my solutions later. Back in 2005/6 URL rewriting was still pretty difficult. I started out back then. I converted to MVC completely when 1.0 version came out specifically to address the SEO concerns. But I guess our discussion is swinging to technical side :)
pixelbath 16y ago
SEOs prefer to have the "relevant content" as high on the page as possible. Since viewstate is just a large blob, many SEOs assume it decreases relevancy. I've never seen results that confirm this assumption. Edit: See sajidnizami's post for the relevant StackOverflow question. Though, this still doesn't make sense to me logically. Why would a search engine disregard a (reasonably) longer page?
- sajidnizami 16y ago
  Longer page would increase page load time. A longer page with viewstate at the beginning would delay loading of content. Google penalizes pages that load slower. http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2010/04/using-site-speed-in-web-search-ranking.html http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2010/04/using-sit...

PonyGumbo 16y ago

In ASP.NET 4.0 and MVC, URL routing is built-in, and it's easy as pie.

sajidnizami 16y ago

Something like this: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1185984/is-viewstate-bad-for-seo http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1185984/is-viewstate-bad-... Yes I talk to them that we have a high traffic site and we lose them because they don't know about building them. Besides you won't find many Microsoft stack sites dealing with scaling issues. I personally looked up Stackoverflow scaling case studies to design my solutions later. Back in 2005/6 URL rewriting was still pretty difficult. I started out back then. I converted to MVC completely when 1.0 version came out specifically to address the SEO concerns. But I guess our discussion is swinging to technical side :)

pixelbath 16y ago

SEOs prefer to have the "relevant content" as high on the page as possible. Since viewstate is just a large blob, many SEOs assume it decreases relevancy. I've never seen results that confirm this assumption. Edit: See sajidnizami's post for the relevant StackOverflow question. Though, this still doesn't make sense to me logically. Why would a search engine disregard a (reasonably) longer page?

sajidnizami 16y ago
Longer page would increase page load time. A longer page with viewstate at the beginning would delay loading of content. Google penalizes pages that load slower. http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2010/04/using-site-speed-in-web-search-ranking.html http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2010/04/using-sit...