Hi, -> pharo-project.org now forwards to pharo.org (there is still old.pharo-project.org to access the old website) -> all subdomains (ci, bugsâ¦.) are now defined for pharo.org, too. (DNS propagation might take a while) -> added links to twitter https://twitter.com/pharoproject http://pharo.org/about http://pharo.org/news Marcus
Marcus: Could the images be hosted in a CDN? (AWS S3 or similar) It is bearable to open one picture, but if you want to do a fast browse through the gallery it takes forever. Around 5 secs per picture, which is a lot for some new visitor, and will probably cause a very high bounce rate. I don't have the fastest connection (10Mbit/sec) but I don't experience this with other sites (see attached basecamp screenshot as comparison). On a mobile device (on which Pharo's site gets appropriate layout), the image size and speed gets even worst given the multiple requests (with an added redirect for each one). Regards, Esteban A. Maringolo 2014-05-23 11:20 GMT-03:00 Marcus Denker <marcus.denker@inria.fr>:
Hi,
-> pharo-project.org now forwards to pharo.org (there is still old.pharo-project.org to access the old website)
-> all subdomains (ci, bugsâ¦.) are now defined for pharo.org, too. (DNS propagation might take a while)
-> added links to twitter https://twitter.com/pharoproject http://pharo.org/about http://pharo.org/news
Marcus
On 25 May 2014, at 16:58, Esteban A. Maringolo <emaringolo@gmail.com> wrote:
Marcus:
Could the images be hosted in a CDN? (AWS S3 or similar) It is bearable to open one picture, but if you want to do a fast browse through the gallery it takes forever. Around 5 secs per picture, which is a lot for some new visitor, and will probably cause a very high bounce rate.
I don't have the fastest connection (10Mbit/sec) but I don't experience this with other sites (see attached basecamp screenshot as comparison). On a mobile device (on which Pharo's site gets appropriate layout), the image size and speed gets even worst given the multiple requests (with an added redirect for each one).
I think the reason is that the small images are actually full size ⦠299kb*4 is a lot. Marcus
2014-05-26 4:56 GMT-03:00 Marcus Denker <marcus.denker@inria.fr>:
On 25 May 2014, at 16:58, Esteban A. Maringolo <emaringolo@gmail.com> wrote:
Marcus:
Could the images be hosted in a CDN? (AWS S3 or similar) It is bearable to open one picture, but if you want to do a fast browse through the gallery it takes forever. Around 5 secs per picture, which is a lot for some new visitor, and will probably cause a very high bounce rate.
I think the reason is that the small images are actually full size ⦠299kb*4 is a lot.
It certainly affects, but if you need to display a big image you have no choice. If you look at the timing view it spends half second connecting and waiting. This is irrelevant of the file size. Regards, Esteban A. Maringolo
participants (2)
-
Esteban A. Maringolo -
Marcus Denker