5 ms·
In response to your edits I agree, it would be nice if we knew more. Our website performance chart is under-representing our site in my opinion and there doesn
by TomGullen 15y ago
In response to your edits I agree, it would be nice if we knew more. Our website performance chart is under-representing our site in my opinion and there doesn't seem to be much we can do about it.
I also think they are possibly counting Tweet button/g+1/Facebook frames in the time which is wrong in my opinion as these are such small fragments on a webpage yet are often responsible for a large percentage of the load time (for us it is up to 50%!)
- CWIZO 15y ago+1 Also I think that if you have video (at least flash, since that's what we have) or games, that then google times the amount of time it takes for the complete video/game to load. Which is complete madness considering that the video/game is playable long before it's fully loaded. But I can't say that it really does that since I have no way of knowing :/ But I do think that you are correct on the widgets part.
- pbhjpbhj 15y agoIf you've got a few games or games on different sites then it seems this would be an easy thing to do A/B testing on. You could provide (what amounts to a splash screen) a small flash file that loads a second flash file when you click "play" or "help" or whatever. Does this for one set of sites and compare how they do in the SERPs and for retention, etc.. Then make a HN post about it.