Forum Moderators: open
Is this because links takes up space?
Each character or space in your html takes up 1 byte of space. To answer your question, yes, it is because there is more content on one page as opposed to the other. In this case, links.
byte
n : a sequence of 8 bits (enough to represent one character of alphanumeric data) processed as a single unit of information.
For example; the word byte is 4 bytes in size. It has 4 characters, each one representing 1 byte of information.
Byte
1 Byte = A Single Character
Kilobyte - kb
1,024 Bytes
Megabyte - mb
1,000,000 Bytes
Gigabyte - gb
1,000,000,000 Bytes = 1,000 Megabytes
Terabyte - tb
1,000,000,000,000 Bytes = 1 Million Megabytes
Petabyte - pb
1x1015 - One times ten to the fifteenth power Bytes = 1 Trillion Megabytes
Exabyte - eb
1x1018 - One times ten to the eighteenth power Bytes = 1 Billion Gigabytes
5 Exabytes = All words ever spoken by humans.
Zettabytes and Yottabytes are the next orders of data powers of ten.
..is 54 bytes long, but..
Some Text
..is only 9 bytes. :)
I am not an expert but 21Kb does not seem unduly large, but you could try an HTML compression program to eliminate most of the white space on your page and reduce it’s overall size.
An example program that I’ve used successfully is called 'HTML Compress' from FreeSoft.
Carry out a Google search using 'HTML compress'
One reason you might wish to consider dividing your page content is if you deem it advantageous with regards to search engine targeting. But as far as file size goes, you are fine. However... this still does not mean you should ignore the 'content to code' ratio. If you have 18kb of code and only 3kb of actual text content, you have a problem.
I would still attempt to nail down the reason for the file size variance between the two similar pages. Do keep in mind that 'white space' does account for file size as StepOne notes.
Using table free designs and CSS for presentational styling can be a huge aid in reducing excess code, without the need for compression utilities. Personally, I never use them, I like to keep my code clean and accessible... I trim out the fat the old-fashioned way.
Best of luck!
- papabaer
I bow to your obviously greater knowledge, in retrospect probably shouldn’t have added my 2 cents worth.
As far as HTML compression utilities go this is a matter of personal preference. Some Developers swear by it, others do not. It's the individual's call.
Now regarding page weight, the sweetspot that was prevalent last year, was to try to keep pages at 40kb or less. Believe me, for sites with any amount of multimedia, images or any non-text content, this is not an easy task. So, in that context, 21kb is pretty darned good.
I did want to point out what is a growing trend, partly due to the assumption that EVERYONE has high-speed Internet access, is that the larger news portal sites such as CNN, MSNBC, BBC and other are getting 'fat,'.... not 'phat.' Somewhere in the neighborhood of 200-300kb... Now what are they thinking?
I had a chance to review a Ford Race fan site the other day--it weighed in at over 520kb! On a 48800 dial-up, it took 3minutes and twenty-four seconds to load. Now THERE is a site with a problem!
One last comment... the thing that has always amazed me about Webmaster World is that all contributions add value. Sometimes we learn something new, othertimes we learn that what we THOUGHT we knew needs a bit of work... but in each and every case, we get an opportunity to view a problem or suggestion, in a fresh new perspective. and while we may not always agree, we almost always benefit from the interaction.
There are no experts... only people who refuse to stop asking questions, and never take anything at face value.
Best regards, papabaer (after all these years, osmosis is finally working!)
They can make a much bigger difference than I would have guessed. I have seen it get 30% smaller.
I agree that 21k isn't that big - but to some people with slow modems - I guess it could be.
There used to be a cool site that listed banners by CTR on various factors. One was size in KB - and it was easy to see a banner a little loarger made for less CTR [they added some special kind of noise - the banners looked the same]
More likely they expect some feedback from the browser that it is following the link (most browsers do this by animating the logo, displaying a progress bar and showing a blank page).
21Kb is a small web page, so don't worry too much about making it smaller.
I would advise against using HTML compressors, they make your code unreadable and ugly.
If you really want to do it properly (and you have Apache) then consider installing mod_gzip [schroepl.net] on your server.
