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

 

[anthony]

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

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

 

[anthony]

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

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.

 

[golddiggerguy]

I don't think it will be the top line for how they rank websites.

• Link backs
• Activity of posts
• SEO friendly Titles and content
• The Domain name

........................................etc

Will be the first in line to judge a site and if divided up percentage wise what would the speed of a site represent?

Matt Cutts did say in a podcast months ago this would be in place so not new news TBH.

 

[Systreg]

As per the BBC link in the original post, although they are taking speed in to account, it's not going to affect many, and they still think the most important ctiteria is:

Despite the change, Google said the most important criteria for ranking results would remain the relevance of a page to a particular query. It said that only about 1% of search queries will be affected by the change to include load speed.

 

[golddiggerguy]

Yes so nothing to worry about and lose sleep over people

 

[fish]

I don't think it will be the top line for how they rank websites.

• Link backs
• Activity of posts
• SEO friendly Titles and content
• The Domain name

........................................etc

yep, have to agree w. the above. Modern day site hosting+designs (what ever platform) pretty much will give a decent load time unless it's too graphic intensive and not optimised to cope. Imo you can only expect to pee off both google and your site visitors if you are being 'too clever'

 

[doodlebug]

I once made a visual directory where every category eg, health had 120 x 60 banners, a total of 336 banners coming from 100s of servers and that was ridiculously slow to load, I soon ditched it.

This slow loading penalty is good for the surfer but depends to what extent ?
How long is slow to google ?

 

[mat]

I wouldnt worry about it. You should be keeping your sites nice and fast anyway.

Who wants good rankings in google when people are just going to get annoyed with your sites and bounce out anyway?

 

[doodlebug]

I wouldnt worry about it. You should be keeping your sites nice and fast anyway.

Who wants good rankings in google when people are just going to get annoyed with your sites and bounce out anyway?

:lol: my visual directory had a 100% bounce rate :lol:

 

[Skinner]

I maintain most other SEO methods so since its something I have thought about previously, this is just that shove I need

Everyone said the last changes to google and caffeine would have no ill effects but look how the last update worked out, lots of us for PR3-4 but how many of us had sites bomb out ?

I had top spot for 5 out or 11 top keywords for my main money spinner, now I have 1 and thats the exact match domain, google traffic has gone from 100-130 a day, to about 30-40 a day since the last update, this is true of several of my sites, so I'm taking all changes seriously now

 

[doodlebug]

I maintain most other SEO methods so since its something I have thought about previously, this is just that shove I need

Everyone said the last changes to google and caffeine would have no ill effects but look how the last update worked out, lots of us for PR3-4 but how many of us had sites bomb out ?

I had top spot for 5 out or 11 top keywords for my main money spinner, now I have 1 and thats the exact match domain, google traffic has gone from 100-130 a day, to about 30-40 a day since the last update, this is true of several of my sites, so I'm taking all changes seriously now

You've got your work cut out.
Good luck getting your sites back to where they were

 

[fish]

sorts the wheat from the chaff comes to mind.
I'm sure theres another adage or two that would also be appropriate ....