toplisek
msg:4361304 | 8:32 am on Sep 12, 2011 (gmt 0) |
Did you try other tools?
1. [developer.yahoo.com...]
2. [webpagetest.org...]
3. [code.google.com...]
|
Oxydada
msg:4361441 | 4:07 pm on Sep 12, 2011 (gmt 0) |
Yes, all those tools report excellent results, specially webpagetest - showing that my pages in 1.5 seconds, average.
|
robzilla
msg:4361466 | 4:43 pm on Sep 12, 2011 (gmt 0) |
Are there also Chrome users who do not experience such aberrant load times on your site, as far as you can tell? How big is the sample, and have you cross-checked these results with other factors, such as geographical location, bandwidth, etc?
|
toplisek
msg:4361497 | 5:53 pm on Sep 12, 2011 (gmt 0) |
In my personal opinion this speed testing depends on many factors. It is limit (time/date fact)within frames. You will never find correct data as various data are inside one number. This is just remind that old websites will never be top ranked. Maybe I'm wrong but I like to help you.
|
perfectionj
msg:4365118 | 5:01 am on Sep 21, 2011 (gmt 0) |
The solution for your problem is:
1. Remove unwanted flash or images form your website.
2. Remove java scripts which are unimportant.
3. Always use CSS to design your website layout.
4. Always host your website on reliable hosting services.
|
renomart
msg:4385540 | 12:59 pm on Nov 10, 2011 (gmt 0) |
This is confusing me too.
My site normally loads in 500ms - 1 second.
However, Google Analytics says 4.5 secs average. Some pages are taking 45secs down to 8 secs!
Weird!
|
still
msg:4385689 | 10:18 pm on Nov 10, 2011 (gmt 0) |
what's the sample rate you are referring to?
|
onlineleben
msg:4385813 | 7:49 am on Nov 11, 2011 (gmt 0) |
| This is just remind that old websites will never be top ranked. |
|
Sorry to disagree - old sites usually lack all the stuff current site design demands and therefore are much faster.
Comparing a plain HTML handmade site with a fresh WP blog site, I get a pagespeed ranking of 90-94, while the WP site only comes out at a low 60
|
|
