Possible slow page loading penalty from Google

[Bluetram]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8615052.stm

[olebean]

thumbs up!

[Skinner]

Kick in the teeth for some CMS inc wordpress and magento.

My Handcoded sites load 10x faster than any cms based, so looks like the era of the code monkey is coming back :P

[anthony]

Originally Posted by Skinner

Kick in the teeth for some CMS inc wordpress and magento.

My Handcoded sites load 10x faster than any cms based, so looks like the era of the code monkey is coming back :P

I wonder if that'll be the same for Joomla, i'm about to dip my toe in that water for the first time?

[Skinner]

I've yet to see an out-the-box install of ANY cms compare to the speed of handcoded.

Now I'm not saying CMS CAN'T be made that fast, because look at some monster CMS like the BBCs site, but the skill level to make a clusterfook like wordpress or magento clean and fast as stig, are beyond the budget/skills of many many many domainers.

I think joomla suffers from lag without caching but I don't use it.

Edit: I think I'm going to be taking out as many queries from my wordpress installs as possible on the next updates :P

[anthony]

Originally Posted by Skinner

I've yet to see an out-the-box install of ANY cms compare to the speed of handcoded.

Now I'm not saying CMS CAN'T be made that fast, because look at some monster CMS like the BBCs site, but the skill level to make a clusterfook like wordpress or magento clean and fast as stig, are beyond the budget/skills of many many many domainers.

I think joomla suffers from lag without caching but I don't use it.

Edit: I think I'm going to be taking out as many queries from my wordpress installs as possible on the next updates :P

A bit unfair really of Google to be doing this, for those of us who require the ease of use of a CMS site, but who are not up to that level of coding themselves, then the likes of Joomla, (maybe) Drupal etc seem on the face of it to be an obvious option.

[Skinner]

I've just tried 2 of my sites, both similar content, one with WP one handcoded with DW.

From the second I hit enter after typing the URL, the hand coded was around 100% faster, the only thing that slowed it down was the advert box, if I remove the advert box, its almost 150% faster.

So this may mean the end of adverts, or maybe putting the adverts in after page load using a post-fetch ajax script of some sort.

This is going to be interesting, as its going to send people back to using inline css as its marginally faster to fully render, its going to stop people using java and flash as its slower to load.

I'm also emailing some affiliates to see about downloading image catalogues as I noted recently that 3rd party hosted aff images cause a little lag on my sites, so now going to have to consider that bandwidth is cheap compared to the google cane

[rob]

Caching, local host images and yslow are all very good things to look at

[Skinner]

Are affiliates generally accepting of locally hosting their catalogue images ?

ProductServe is the 3rd party which lags the hell out of my aff pages, I really don't like using their links.

I'll the general replies I get from the affs about hoovering up their product images, when I get some.

[blether]

I use YSlow to optimise our sites, and one of the biggest performance issues we've seen is from remote banners and images. We now copy and host all product and banner images ourselves, and it's made a big difference.

And +1 for handcoded sites generally outstripping CMS sites, especially Wordpress. It's a fair investment to write your own publishing platform, but it does pay if you're going to deploy a lot of similar sites.