I would like to ask webmasters, what optimal website page sizes are?
3DProf4online
0
Light Poster
Recommended Answers
Jump to PostAbsolutely no more than 50K.
Jump to PostLet me put it this way:
Speed isn't everything. It's the only thing. Your site should instantly respond to a request. If you have to wait 4 seconds until something happens, you are in big trouble.
Page size = the smaller, the better. Keep it under 15k if …
Jump to PostThis is what http://www.websiteoptimization.com/services/analyze/ had to say about my current project. Follow the link to try your website. Valuable info.
"HTML_SIZE - Congratulations, the total size of this HTML file is 8824 …
All 12 Replies
MVied
11
Junior Poster
Absolutely no more than 50K.
jb1ker
2
Junior Poster in Training
Let me put it this way:
Speed isn't everything. It's the only thing. Your site should instantly respond to a request. If you have to wait 4 seconds until something happens, you are in big trouble.
Page size = the smaller, the better. Keep it under 15k if you can. Keep it under 12k if you can. Keep it under 10k if you can. You're getting the idea here, right?
Remember = 80% of your surfers will be at 56K or less. Keep those preferences in mind when designing.
MVied, 50k is way over the maximum.
jb1ker
2
Junior Poster in Training
This is what http://www.websiteoptimization.com/services/analyze/ had to say about my current project. Follow the link to try your website. Valuable info.
"HTML_SIZE - Congratulations, the total size of this HTML file is 8824 bytes, which less than 20K. Assuming that you specify the HEIGHT and WIDTH of your images, this size allows your page to display content in well under 8 seconds, the average time users are willing to wait for a page to display without feedback."
MVied
11
Junior Poster
Rofl 80% of the users on dial up? That's hilarious.
jb1ker
2
Junior Poster in Training
Stats speak for itself. Not everyone has access to high-speed internet.
The world is bigger than just the US. Think outside the box.
MVied
11
Junior Poster
That depends on your target audience. I'm well aware that parts of the world only have dial-up. So I suppose if your target audience doesn't include the US, Japan, China, or Europe, then sure, 80% of your users might be on dial-up. Realistically if you're talking about a world-wide audience, you may have 30% on dial-up. For my websites, I generally offer a low bandwidth version that's basically a minimalistic version of the site. I do that with the older generations in mind because they don't always like the fancy designs and can't read the text, but I suppose it helps dial-up users also.
jb1ker
2
Junior Poster in Training
Just for your information. I'm currently living in South Africa. Yesterday there was a article about a pigeon beating the internet in delivering a package. Over the distance of 80km's the pigeon reached it's goal in about 2 hours, the internet status was at 4%. That's how slow internet is here. Just informing...
valonesal
0
Junior Poster
Another thing that I think is being greatly over looked here is optimization and compression. If caching and compression is done correctly then you site can be a bit larger and still load faster than smaller pages.
newviewit.com
2
Junior Poster in Training
The average from what I've read is under 100kb.
Depends on your customer profile. If they are in modern cities then a little larger. If they are on dialup then maybe smaller if possible.
There are also numerous tools to decrease page load times such as AJAX
almostbob
866
Retired: passive income ROCKS
apache Mod_gzip mod_deflate will compress on the fly if enabled in apache or php headers
and browser accept headers are there
best speed tweak has been,
given that transparent.gif is a 1*1px transparent.gif image
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<!-- @(#) $Id$ -->
<head>
<title>HTML Template</title>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1" />
<meta name="Keywords" content="your,keywords,here" />
<meta name="Description" content="." />
<meta http-equiv="pragma" content="no-cache" />
<meta http-equiv="cache-control" content="no-cache" />
<link rel="shortcut icon" href="/favicon.ico" type="image/x-icon" />
<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="style.css" />
</head>
<body>
<img src='fastimage.gif' id='img1' width='320' height='200' alt='image you want to display fast text'>
<!--- bla bla bla all the stuff that you want to display fast -->
<img src='transparent.gif' id='img1' width='320' height='200' alt='image1 that is not really urgent text'>
<!--- bla bla bla all the stuff that you want to display fast -->
<img src='transparent.gif' id='img2' width='320' height='200' alt='image2 that is not really urgent text'>
<!--- bla bla bla all the stuff that you want to display fast -->
<img src='transparent.gif' id='img3' width='320' height='200' alt='image3 that is not really urgent text'>
<!--- bla bla bla all the stuff that you want to display fast -->
<script type='text/javascript'>
document.getElementById('img1').src='realimage1.href';
document.getElementById('img2').src='realimage2.href';
document.getElementById('img3').src='realimage3.href';
</body>
</html>the page loads and functions, then javascript loads images in the background and replaces blank transparent images
Images Known to be required in subsequent pages can be background loaded, while user reads this page, giving the impression that pages load faster than they really do, but nobody notices they delay because the page already works
use css effects instead of graphic effects for menus
I still see review requests on sites where a 1024*768 image is resized in html to 100*80 to be an icon, a 450KB icon, serv images at the displayed size
Geoff Hinde
0
Newbie Poster
I would like to ask webmasters, what optimal website page sizes are?
Depends where you are and your market.
If most on dial-up be simple. If ADSL, add a few bells and whistles (Flash).
I have found that front page for first should be simple. Keep Flash to inside pages, which gives option for slower viewers to wait if they want to se it. You can't afford to miss the impatient viewers who will not stay to see if your front page doesn't download in less than 20 seconds on any connection.
More importantly, on any pages make sure images are compressed for quick download.
A major problem is trying to install images of over 100KB on a page.
The web only renders 75KB as a jpg, so if you get an image that is huge in raw format, use your graphics program to resize it to an optimal image for the web and compress it to its lowest size comparable to what looks good on the screen.
You can take an image of 10MB and reduce it to 60Kb if you do it right.
That way your pages will download quickly.
migcosta
13
Junior Poster
Well..
I disagree with you all ehehehheheheheheh :D
For me.. the size limit of the main file (the actual size of the file .html .php. asp and so on) is 200Kb.. and where is why:
http://articles.sitepoint.com/article/indexing-limits-where-bots-stop#
Know-a-days you don’t need to worry about the loading time of a page, the slower connections users know they have to wait to see the content of a web site… If you have a 200KB html file it will load in 5 to 8 seconds and that is reasonable for a slow internet connection
I think you have to worry more out search engines and make that the size standart…
As for the images and other multimedia types, a good wed-designer always uses techniques that minimize the use of web packages… making the loading time of this elements really low..
Best regards
Be a part of the DaniWeb community
We're a friendly, industry-focused community of developers, IT pros, digital marketers, and technology enthusiasts meeting, networking, learning, and sharing knowledge.