Google Takes Notice And Makes +1 Button Faster

[Fotiman]

---

System: The following 6 messages were cut out of thread at: http://www.webmasterworld.com/google/4337232.htm [webmasterworld.com] by engine - 6:19 pm on Jul 27, 2011 (utc +1)

---

For those who don't know, the updated code for the Google +1 button can be generated here:
[google.com...]

The +1 Button: Now Faster
[googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com]

One of the 10 things we hold to be true here at Google is that fast is better than slow. We keep speed in mind in all things that we do, and the +1 button is no exception. Since the button’s launch, we have been hard at work improving its load time. Today, we’re proud to announce two updates that will make both the +1 button and the page loading it, faster.

First, we’ve begun to roll out out a set of changes that will make the button render up to 3x faster on your site. No action is required on your part, so just sit back, relax, and watch as the button loads more quickly than before.

[edited by: engine at 5:20 pm (utc) on Jul 27, 2011]
[edit reason] added quote [/edit]

[icedowl]

<!-- Place this tag where you want the +1 button to render -->
<g:plusone></g:plusone>

<!-- Place this tag after the last plusone tag -->
<script type="text/javascript">
(function() {
var po = document.createElement('script'); po.type = 'text/javascript'; po.async = true;
po.src = 'https://apis.google.com/js/plusone.js';
var s = document.getElementsByTagName('script')[0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore(po, s);
})();
</script>

I don't understand what they mean by the instruction I bolded above. Does it mean to put it right after the <g:plusone></g:plusone> line or where else? Maybe it's just too early in the day for my brain to think.

[vandread]

Ice, yes that is what it means.

[Fotiman]

@icedowl, Put it just before your closing </body> tag.

[WarmGlow]

The new asynchronous code is indeed faster but there are still two major issues for me:

1. To increment the +1 count, the visitor must have a Google account, must be logged in to their Google account and must have a public profile. I've estimated that approximately 20 percent of my site visitors have a Google account but I have no way of knowing the number that are actually logged in and have set up a public profile.

2. The +1 code does not validate as W3C HTML 4.01 Transitional. The basic code when put into a DIV with class="g-plusone" does validate but the other parameters such as data-count="false" and data-size="standard" do not validate.

[yaashul]

Warmglow thats the problem with google +1 its never validates but does this create any problem?

[philooo]

I removed it when I saw how slow it was.

Google did not live up to their name on this one. After all that PR about page load speed, they send us a code that is not even polished and release an update 2 month later..

This +1 button should not have been release until it is ready !

That kind of mistake is what will kill this project...

They have too much going on, nothing is good, lots of things are ok, but none are good enough to make a real difference..

very sad coming from Google

Good news for us :) Google might not be as capable as we all thought !

[WarmGlow]

yaashul wrote:

Warmglow thats the problem with google +1 its never validates but does this create any problem?

Yes, it is a problem for me. I validate every edited page and when validation fails, I am slowed down while I check to see which lines of code did not validate. This, coupled with the fact that only a small percentage of my site visitors can actually increment the +1 count make it a "no go" for me, for now.

[proboscis]

I'm still removing it when I get around to working on the site where I've added it. So far only one click and that came from the serps not from my site...

so far the + one is not awesome

And I don't like the name either.

[trinorthlighting]

Same boat, it slows down the website and when we did testing, no one clicked on it. Plus 1 can not compete with the facebook button.

[Fotiman]

1. To increment the +1 count, the visitor must have a Google account, must be logged in to their Google account and must have a public profile.

Isn't the same true of the Facebook and Tweet buttons as well? That is, in order to Facebook Like something, you must be signed in to Facebook, and in order to Tweet something, you must have a Twitter account. The button doesn't make any sense otherwise, because then you could just +1 your own page a million times.

[Pfui]

I realize G's scheme is new, and iffy, but multiple +1 pages with 0 counts look as sad as multiple blog entries with 0 comments. Might as well hang a sign saying, "Not worth reading."

Speaking of counts... Maybe the no-count button styles would render more quickly. (If nothing else, their locations would look less unpopular.)

[netmeg]

I took the count off the plus one button; it looked silly with 3 plus ones next to almost 4000 Facebook likes.

It's good that they released a faster version; I can't help but wonder why they didn't just wait to announce it till they had the asynchronous version ready to go, though.

(The validation issue is a PITA, but the FB OGP stuff doesn't validate without jumping through hoops either)

Normal people aren't using +1 because they don't know what it is. But people on Google+ are using it all over the place. So maybe Google is hoping that as more and more people get into Google+, they'll get acclimated to the +1 button there, and start using it elsewhere.

Hey, I know it's convoluted and ridiculous. But it's a theory.

[Sgt_Kickaxe]

How do you ditch the count on tall buttons? It's the only one where the blue +1 image is the right size for my site but apparently the only one I can't remove the count from.

P.S. If Google REALLY wanted to make it faster they would offer a static image/link which we can append information to. It works with facebook and twitter without a javascript file to load...

I suspect part of the purpose for NOT offering that is to gather visitor data, they want to know WHO is visiting which site and forcing a javascript file load gives them that. Next to my facebook and twitter buttons which require NO javascript file Google is the SLOWEST of the three, by a lot.

Also, some people get security warnings because of the javascript file to which Google responds...

The +1 button code requires a script from Google's servers. You can include this script using either http:// or [,...] like this:

<script src="https://apis.google.com/js/plusone.js"></script>

If your web page uses [,...] some browsers and verification tools will show an error when any assets on the page are called via [....] If your site serves pages via [,...] make sure that the +1 button code on those pages also uses [....] (In fact, it's fine to use https:// in the button code for all pages, even if they are only served via [.)<...]

I'll wait until they release a url/image based system without forced javascript.

[Sgt_Kickaxe]

Wow, that sounded harsh when I re-read it, which isn't the sentiment I was wanting to convey so...

Thank you Google for making it faster, I apologize for sounding ungrateful, but please tie this beast in to the Google +1 social network instead of making it universal and provide a javascript free alternative that involves no files or tracking on your part. Facebook and twitter have already done that, you'll have my full attention then.

[ChanandlerBong]

does this mean if we set +1 button up a few weeks ago with the header code, that all that can now be discarded with?

[Davidcjmad1]

What a pile of doo doo is this google plus one button , im sorry I spent a lot of time getting my sites load optimized to go and add 6 https calls and over 100Kb of javascript and sundry items to the page. I would add it with no count and small size but for that. ITs a case of left half not talking to the right half with the google brain.. ( the irony is the speed is great engineers tools is busy telling me to minify and combine the js and lowering my test site speed score..why they couldnt just put the whole thing even in one neat package i dont too,, too busy running scared from facebook to do things half properly.

I pretty sure also that apple mobile clients wont cache anything over 25kb although im not sure about that.


" - " 1