Forum Moderators: phranque

Message Too Old, No Replies

Page Load Simulation Software?

         

coastal

12:01 am on Mar 4, 2002 (gmt 0)



Has anyone found software that can emulate different connections to test page load speeds?

The only thing I've found that even somewhat resembles what I'm looking for is at OptiView [optiview.com].

Sure, Dreamweaver estimates how long a page takes to load, but I want to see where the bottlenecks are occurring and to actually experience the wait. :)

Is there a better web or client based tool that will allow me to check this?

mdharrold

12:17 am on Mar 4, 2002 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



[netmechanic.com...]
Quite a few useful tools.

coastal

7:11 pm on Mar 4, 2002 (gmt 0)



Thanks for the link mdharrod, NetMechanic is a useful site.

I guess I'm looking for more of a visual tool that will show me greater detail on loading performance with varying connection speeds.

In the past, I've relied a little too much on nested tables for layout, and am now trying to find a tool that will allow me to test their impact on load speed.

Thanks again!

tedster

7:45 pm on Mar 4, 2002 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



Nested tables are a rendering issue more than a download issue. HTML comes down the pipe just as fast whether it contains divs, tables or a mix of the two.

The challenges come from processor speed and the way the browser you use is coded.

coastal

8:46 pm on Mar 4, 2002 (gmt 0)



yep, I totally agree. It's just easier to see the bottlenecks when at a lower connection speed. ;)

What browser do you guys find is the worst performer in terms of rendering speeds?

I find Netscape 4.08 is pretty slow at rendering nested tables. Maybe I'll just use this as a measure and assume that if it loads quickly in 4.08 (all compatibility issues resolved), it will be fine for IE/Netscape 6.
:)

tedster

9:09 pm on Mar 4, 2002 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



Yep, Netscape Navigator 4.08 (Communicator 4.7) is the champion slowpoke on tables. There is another rendering issue, however, where Netscape does better than IE, and that is progressive JPGs.

Netscape handles them standardly, displaying each one of several sharpening passes. But IE shows nothing until the final version of the image is displayed all at once. So the net result is WORSE rendering time for progressive jpg than standard jpg. At least standard unrolls like a window shade, one line at a time.

If you place several progressive jpg images inside deeply nested tables you can confound both the browsers into showing a blank page for a nice long time!