Could anybody check the speed of my site please?

Discussion in 'Computer Support' started by Ben Jones, Aug 13, 2006.

  1. Ben Jones

    Ben Jones Guest

    My website seems to be loading up pretty slowly. I could do with a few
    people checking it to see how quickly it displays for different people to
    see if the problem lies with my ISP or the web hosting company.

    the site is

    And info or feedback regarding speed is much appeciated.


    Ben Jones, Aug 13, 2006
    1. Advertisements

  2. Ben Jones

    Rod Speed Guest

    It load quite slowly here with 1.5M adsl.
    Rod Speed, Aug 13, 2006
    1. Advertisements

  3. Ben Jones

    me Guest

    It loaded very slow for me,about 1 minute to display the page and all the
    thumbnail images. I'm on a 4mbit connection.
    me, Aug 14, 2006
  4. Ben Jones

    Old Gringo Guest

    Without Any Hesitation, Ben Jones Wrote The Following:
    76.438s Marfa, Tx. 6Mb ADSL
    Old Gringo, Aug 14, 2006
  5. Ben Jones

    Ben Jones Guest

    Cheers guys :eek:) I appreciate you taking the time to help me.

    Looks like it a problem with the webhost. Time to have a word.

    Ben Jones, Aug 14, 2006
  6. Very, very slow on my 7Mbps cable, in western New York.

    Try this:
    It even got tired of waiting.
    Beauregard T. Shagnasty, Aug 14, 2006
  7. Ben Jones

    Whiskers Guest

    Working well here. Passes 'validation' by the HTML validator at
    <> too :))

    London, ADSLMax clocking 3.84 Mbps at the moment.

    Opera 9.01, Linux.
    Whiskers, Aug 14, 2006
  8. Gary G. Taylor, Aug 14, 2006
  9. Ben Jones

    Old Gringo Guest

    Without Any Hesitation, Ben Jones Wrote The Following:
    3.734s today. Congratulations.
    Old Gringo, Aug 14, 2006
  10. Ben Jones

    Mr User Guest

    Faster Fox says 7.76 secs with 10Mb/s broadband connection.
    Mr User, Aug 14, 2006
  11. Yes, much better here as well since yesterday. The analyze page can even
    cope today, stating:

    Download Times*
    Connection Rate Download Time
    14.4K 173.46 seconds
    28.8K 86.93 seconds
    33.6K 74.57 seconds
    56K 44.90 seconds
    ISDN 128K 14.03 seconds
    T1 1.44Mbps 1.58 seconds

    Not too bad for a quarter-megabyte page.
    Beauregard T. Shagnasty, Aug 14, 2006
  12. Ben Jones

    Ben Jones Guest

    Cheers Everybody :eek:)

    I had a few words with the web hosting company. At first they claimed there
    was nothing wrong but after a bit of persuading they found a problem and
    sorted it :eek:)

    Seems to be nice and quick again now...I'm a happy chappy!

    Thanks again to everybody who took time to help me :eek:)

    Ben Jones, Aug 14, 2006
  13. Ben Jones

    Plato Guest

    Contact your ISP for the fix.
    Plato, Aug 14, 2006
  14. Ben Jones

    Dolphin Guest

    No problem from here.
    Dolphin, Aug 15, 2006
  15. Ben Jones

    Margolotta Guest

    Fine for me here. Both Safari and Firefox loaded it in under 5s (4.348
    according to FasterFox - a page loading timer extension - Safari was timed
    with a stopwatch).

    I have an 8Mbit DSL connection and am running OS X 10.4.7.

    Just tested it on my Windows box and it's roughly a second slower (5.289). I
    wonder if it's anything to do with the fact that both myself and the OP are
    both located in the UK and it's something to do with the site being routed

    To the OP, cunning way to plug your site... ;o) <g>

    Could someone else in the UK (Whiskers, Ponder, etc) test and see what
    results they get, just to test my theory?
    Margolotta, Aug 17, 2006
  16. Ben Jones

    mike Guest

    took about 4 seconds. (cable modem)

    mike, Aug 17, 2006
  17. Blinky the Shark, Aug 17, 2006
  18. Ben Jones

    Whiskers Guest

    I was here on Monday <>,
    probably at about the same time as the web host confessed the error of
    their ways and put things right for the original poster
    <m64Eg.3459$> ;))
    Whiskers, Aug 17, 2006
  19. Ben Jones

    why? Guest

    6 seconds longer than the usual find another site.

    Blueyonder max 10Mbps D/L speed.
    At least you get the thumbnail thing, the images are small 108 x 150
    Pixels typically. However try making then smaller, they don't need to be
    16,7 Millions (24 BitsPerPixel) and using jpg.

    Trying Irfan View and redouce color depth to 256, November 24
    7.31 KB (7,486 Bytes)
    6.38 KB (6,538 Bytes)
    948 bytes smaller * 20 = 18960.

    View Source in Ultraedit 100138 Bytes, there are lots of

    <multiple spaces><newline>

    Trim trailing spaces, 95726 , 4413 bytes saved. Remove the
    <newline><newline> 94801 (haven't checked resulting output) another 925

    It's nice while developing to indent with
    " <input" , bnut that isn't needed for displaying, get rid of all
    those extra spaces.

    More so in places like, using <space> to format
    things in the div.

    <ul class="giInfo">
    Date: 05/12/04


    Size: 20 items
    (2921 items total)
    Owner: Gallery Administrator

    When it looks like

    Date: 05/12/04
    Size: 20 items (2921 items total)
    Owner: Gallery Administrator

    Make the page load faster, split into
    Current Week , Last Week , This month sort of thing.

    Not much point going to XHTML 1.0 then serving it out as text/html.
    Although that a long discussion, see many of the web development forumns
    / blogs.

    Saving page (Mozilla) as complte web page, the resulting files are 184K,
    that's far too big.

    why?, Aug 17, 2006
  20. Ben Jones

    Margolotta Guest

    I'm slow on the uptake - I've spent the last week camping in the wilds of
    North Oxfordshire (damned fine real ale round that way, if you like that sort
    of thing...). Fairport's Cropredy Convention, to be precise (if you like that
    kinda thing...)
    Margolotta, Aug 17, 2006
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.