Subject:
|
Re: New website layout, what you think?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general, lugnet.publish
|
Date:
|
Thu, 13 Jul 2000 21:53:33 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
115 times
|
| |
| |
comments below
> Personally, I don't mind waiting for a 83K page over the modem. (In fact, I
> usually load many pages simultaneously, a slow task over 33.6, so I don't
> worrk about speed very often.) Is there some general consensus about what a
> decent-sized Web page should be?
I'd be interested in knowing this. I'm happy with anything that is 100kb or
less. But I'm an ex-cable modem and new dsl person, so I'd like to hear from
the normal modem users.
>
> I'm not sure total page size (HTML + graphics) is a good indicator anyway;
> I've started to notice that much more time can be taken up in the new
> connection lag than in the actual image download, esp. over a modem.
I agree here, with a fast connect/reconnect everything is very fast, with lag
it is almost intolerable. Where does most of this lag come from?
pat j
>
> Cheers,
> - jsproat
|
|
Message has 1 Reply: | | Re: New website layout, what you think?
|
| (...) I'm not entirely sure, though I suspect that PPP or SLIP are not optimized for a protocol like HTTP which makes many new socket connections in a short period of time. I have discovered that telnet and even FTP performace is much better than (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jul-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.publish)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: New website layout, what you think?
|
| (...) Cool! (...) Well to be honest, I'm running through a T1 line, so I'm not an effective judge of download times. Perhaps when I get my 33.6 hooked up at home again... Personally, I don't mind waiting for a 83K page over the modem. (In fact, I (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jul-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.publish)
|
8 Messages in This Thread:
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|