Invision Community 4: SEO, prepare for v5 and dormant account notifications By Matt November 11, 2024
joelle Posted March 30, 2011 Posted March 30, 2011 Since PageSpeed is getting more and more important to forum users and Google, we would like to see pagespeed being improved on IP.Board 3.2. Using the pagespeed extension (for the chrome browser) it doesn't look too good on IP.Board 3.1 compared to other forum software.
bfarber Posted March 30, 2011 Posted March 30, 2011 We do actively use pagespeed and yslow to monitor the software. Some things simply are not doable in our position (i.e. CSS sprites, because it raises the barrier to change the software too high for the average user) and some things need to be done at the server level. We will go through all of our available performance tools upon release, but we won't make the software difficult to use for the majority of our customers to make it "a little" faster either. There's a balance.
Rowen7 Posted April 12, 2011 Posted April 12, 2011 I for one, welcome our Google Overlords. If they say CSS Sprites are needed, then they are. In the mean time, there is a beta plugin:
Jυra Posted April 13, 2011 Posted April 13, 2011 Since PageSpeed is getting more and more important to forum users and Google Page speed isn't important to Google.
Nick² Posted April 13, 2011 Posted April 13, 2011 We do actively use pagespeed and yslow to monitor the software. Some things simply are not doable in our position (i.e. CSS sprites, because it raises the barrier to change the software too high for the average user) and some things need to be done at the server level. We will go through all of our available performance tools upon release, but we won't make the software difficult to use for the majority of our customers to make it "a little" faster either. There's a balance. I certainly do appreciate the ease of changing an icon or the like as it is now. However, what about having a new tool that allows admins to (re)generate CSS sprites on the fly from what they currently have. It'll look at the template bits, find what images it needs, create the sprite and CSS. The skin cache would be then be updated to use the sprite. Doing it this way allows a seamless transition for admins, as we'd still edit templates as we do now, but the software will generate the sprites for us. Possibly allow the admin to choose what images should be in the sprite (by template bit or image name), or create separate sprites for each template group.
Rikki Posted April 13, 2011 Posted April 13, 2011 I like the idea (someone in the community has made an application that does something similar), but unfortunately it isn't feasible for 3.2. On the plus side, 3.2 uses far fewer images than 3.1 did, so there'll be a built-in advantage.
Management Matt Posted April 13, 2011 Management Posted April 13, 2011 This isn't a scientific measurement, but Safari reports the following stats: IP.Board 3.1.4 Topic View IP.Board 3.2.0 Topic View
marklcfc Posted April 13, 2011 Posted April 13, 2011 Not keen on less images. Hope you've not removed the images? <_<
Management Charles Posted April 13, 2011 Management Posted April 13, 2011 Why do you consider those images so critical? All they do is create a column to the left of the topic title full of little folder images :)
marklcfc Posted April 13, 2011 Posted April 13, 2011 Yes then. <_< They are critical as they are a part of forums, they are useful to define which are new topics, popular topics, but most importantly which topics have been closed or moved. They are easy on the eye and didn't warrent being removed, decisions like this and squashing 3 lines of info under each topic in VNC are very poor moves. It makes topic view less attractive. You've made far too many changes in 3.2. You should have added all the new functionality (which is great btw), ajax posting, quoting, etc to 3.2 for forum admins like myself who NEED that but didn't need a brand new skin. You should have left redesigning the site to 4.0 like vbulletin did. Too bad I'm fighting a losing battle, but if you did that we could have had 3.2 out by now with up to date functionality and I guarantee you'd have more pleased forum admins. Instead its like you're dangling us showing us previews of whats to come in 6+ months but considering what we've paid, we should already have!!
Rikki Posted April 13, 2011 Posted April 13, 2011 Forgive me, but you haven't seen most of 3.2. Surely you aren't in a position to comment on how effective the changes are at this point? Perhaps it'd be better to wait until you've seen it before passing judgement :)
marklcfc Posted April 13, 2011 Posted April 13, 2011 Forgive me, but you haven't seen most of 3.2. Surely you aren't in a position to comment on how effective the changes are at this point? Perhaps it'd be better to wait until you've seen it before passing judgement :) As I've said the functionality is much better (we should already have that though?) its the overall look I have doubts about, and whilst you're keeping that a secret you're open to concerns/worries as its our sites that are going to be affected. (for the good, hopefully, but I have doubts)
Aisha Posted April 13, 2011 Posted April 13, 2011 Forgive me, but you haven't seen most of 3.2. Surely you aren't in a position to comment on how effective the changes are at this point? Perhaps it'd be better to wait until you've seen it before passing judgement :) This is what you guys say every time someone says something about the design. "Oh just wait until you see 3.2, that'll make you shut up." Well, when you refuse to show us the design, then we have to assume that it's not ready yet which means that it's not completed which in turn means that we , as logical human beings, will continue to spout off our suggestions acting like our opinion is the only one that matters until you complete the 3.2 design, show it to us, and rub it in our faces on how amazing you guys are (alternatively we all hate it and rub it in your faces on how you're doing everything wrong). /runon
Management Charles Posted April 13, 2011 Management Posted April 13, 2011 They are critical as they are a part of forums, they are useful to define which are new topics, popular topics, but most importantly which topics have been closed or moved. They are easy on the eye and didn't warrent being removed, decisions like this and squashing 3 lines of info under each topic in VNC are very poor moves. It makes topic view less attractive. You can still easily see what's new, popular, what's closed, and what's moved in 3.2 even without those ugly folder icons :)
marklcfc Posted April 13, 2011 Posted April 13, 2011 You can still easily see what's new, popular, what's closed, and what's moved in 3.2 even without those ugly folder icons :) I agree that they are ugly, but that doesn't mean they should be rid of altogether. I've been using alternative icons on my site.
Aisha Posted April 13, 2011 Posted April 13, 2011 I think this is a classic example of where it's better to show then to tell. Since we all know that's not going to happen, lets just move on shall we?
bfarber Posted April 13, 2011 Posted April 13, 2011 You should have left redesigning the site to 4.0 like vbulletin did. Too bad I'm fighting a losing battle, but if you did that we could have had 3.2 out by now with up to date functionality and I guarantee you'd have more pleased forum admins. Instead its like you're dangling us showing us previews of whats to come in 6+ months but considering what we've paid, we should already have!! Just for clarification, interface updates have VERY little effect on the speed of release. We have backend developers (me, Matt, Terabyte, etc.) and interface designers (Rikki, etc.). Rikki works on the interface, we work on the backend code. Even if Rikki weren't redoing the interface, the backend code, bug fixes, etc. still require the same amount of time. We work in tandem, not one after the other.
Management Matt Posted April 13, 2011 Management Posted April 13, 2011 This is just a few general observations. Just because the image KB is less in 3.2, it doesn't mean we've removed all iconography. Rikki uses CSS 3 gradients instead of BG images which helps reduce the bandwidth. We've also consolidated other icons into something more meaningful. Generally speaking, the topic icon doesn't serve much purpose as it's just the same image that is repeated down a column. That said, it doesn't mean we don't have one and/or we've removed any functionality or usefulness in the interface. I have large reservations about showing you major interface panels via a screenshot because with no context and no interactivity, they aren't that useful.
Jυra Posted April 13, 2011 Posted April 13, 2011 Why do you consider those images so critical? All they do is create a column to the left of the topic title full of little folder images :) Folders are a bit old school. Even though they could be changed, I won't miss them.
Justin.F Posted April 15, 2011 Posted April 15, 2011 Ok I have to share this from webmaster tools for my forums - see attached lol I don't know how accurate that is as the site loads in less than a second for me
Justin.F Posted April 18, 2011 Posted April 18, 2011 Justin, your website link? www.tech-101.com I know it doesn't take 18.6 seconds to load
joelle Posted April 18, 2011 Author Posted April 18, 2011 Page speed isn't important to Google. Well, for seo and search ranking it sure is important. I am not exactly sure if my google webmaster chart is correct, since the graph looks pretty odd. ^^
Jυra Posted April 18, 2011 Posted April 18, 2011 Well, for seo and search ranking it sure is important. Your link does not contain any information that leads me to believe that page speed improves ranking and SEO.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.