Page speed tools
-
Working on reducing page load time, since that is one of the ranking factors that Google uses. I've been using Page Speed FireFox plugin (requires FireBug), which is free. Pretty happy with it but wondering if others have pointers to good tools for this task.
Thanks...
-
If you're using wordpress or a CMS of some type, look for posts and tools related to that particular software. The SmushIt tool is available as a wordpress plugin, and it will compress pictures on upload, and will compress (on demand) pictures in the media library.
I use Irfanview for batch resizing images (in the same directory).
-
Have you considered using a CDN? This will cache your site in multiple locations so end users site experience will be better.
-
YSlow for firebug is very useful, don't forget to run SmushIt (Tools in YSlow) to have optimized images. Spites + GZip + 1 single packed CSS + 1 single packed JS + expires headers are very effective. Use media domain if you have a lot of pictures on the page.
See the real load time in the Net tab of firebug as Gary said.
-
I have gone through this same process recently.
FireBug's NET tab, the page speed plugin and Yahoo YSlow plugins were the way to go.
I had a page load time of about 10 seconds before optimising. I reduced this to about 6 seconds by doing the following:
- Using different domain names (e.g. static.mysite.com, static2.mysite.com, static3.mysite.com) to increase parallel downloads of CSS/images etc.
- Gzip
- Reducing size of all images
I then managed to decrease this further to about 1.5 seconds by changing server hosts.
-
decrease size of your pictures by 30% in most cases you wont even see the difference, but it helps a lot with load time.
Also check if you have any errors: http://validator.w3.org/ and http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/
Good Luck.
-
yslow for firefox
and good old Google Webmaster Tools
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
SeoMoz On-Page Rating
Hello everyone! I am just checking the on-page optimization for the website I look after and I am getting some ratings related to the keywords I target for those pages. How should I consider the numeric score I get? (10 on average) Also what is a good score for those pages? Cheers Oscar
On-Page Optimization | | PremioOscar1 -
What kind of pages are they?
Hi all, after making an analysis of my website the tool has found two pages that I don't know what refers to: /?page id=2058 (only one page of this kind) /?attachment id= (only one page of this kind) does anyone know what kind of pages they could be? Do the have relevancy regading SEO? The plattform is Wordpress. Thanks!
On-Page Optimization | | juanmiguelcr0 -
"City page" links in footer of home page: Spammy?
Is listing a bunch of links to city pages in the footer of a home page considered "spammy" to Google? (ie- Chicago Alarms, Illinois Alarms, Naperville Alarms, etc.) What are the negative affects this might have on ranking, if any?
On-Page Optimization | | MChi0 -
Is reported duplication on the pages or their canonical pages?
There are several sections getting flagged for duplication on one of our sites: http://mysite.com/section-1/?something=X&confirmed=true
On-Page Optimization | | Safelincs
http://mysite.com/section-2/?something=X&confirmed=true
http://mysite.com/section-3/?something=X&confirmed=true Each of the above are showing as having duplicates of the other sections. Indeed, these pages are exactly the same (it's just an SMS confirmation page you enter your code in), however, they all have canonical links back to the section (without the query string), i.e. section-1, section-2 and section-3 respectively. These three sections have unique content and aren't flagged up for duplications themselves, so my questions are: Are the pages with the query strings the duplicates, and if so why are the canonical links being ignored? or Are the canonical pages without the query strings the duplicates, and if so why don't they appear as URLs in their own right in the duplicate content report? I am guessing it's the former, but I can't figure out why it would ignore the canonical links. Any ideas? Thanks0 -
Product page optimalisation
Throughout the years our website kept on growing this has led to product pages that have so much sub-pages that nobody is able to really get a good idea of the product. We are working on a new website where the visitor is central. Together with a usability partner we have down sized the preferred data to fit on one page with a tabular system with a maximum of 4 taps. My question will this affect our find ability if we go from 10 to 15 sub-pages to one main page
On-Page Optimization | | TiasNimbas0 -
To Reduce (pages)... or not to Reduce?
Our site has a large Business Directory with millions of pages. For examples' sake, let's say it's a directory of Restaurants. Each Restaurant has 4 pages on the site, each tied together through a row of tabs across the top of the page: Tab 1 - Basic super 7 info - name, location, contact info Tab 2 - Restaurant menu Tab 3 - Restaurant reviews Tab 4 - Photos of food The Tab 1 page generates 95% of our traffic, and 90% of conversions. The conversion rate on Tab 2 - Tab 4 pages is 6 - 10x greater than Tab 1 conversions. Total Conversions from search queries on menus, reviews and food are 20% higher than are conversions resulting from searches on restaurant name & info alone. We're working with a consultant on a redesign, who wants to consolidate the 4 pages into one. Their advice is to focus on making a better page, featuring all of the content, sacrifice a little organic traffic but make up any losses by improving conversion. My counterpoint is that we shouldn't scrap the Tab 2-4 pages just because they have lower traffic - we should make the pages BETTER. The content we display is thin, and we have plenty of data we could expose to make the pages more robust. By consolidating it will also be hard to optimize a page for people searching for name/location AND menu AND reviews AND photos. We're asking that one page to do too much, and it's likely we will see diminished search volume for queries on menu, reviews and food. I think the decline will be much more significant than the consultant estimates. The consultant says there will be little change to organic traffic. since Tab 1 already generates 95% of traffic. Through basic math, they're saying the risk is a 5% decline in organic traffic. Further, they see little chance of queries for menu, reviews, and food declining because most of those queries tend to send people too the home page or Tab 1 page anyway. Finally, the designer of the new wireframes admitted that potential organic traffic risks were not taken into consideration when they recommended consolidating the pages. I sincerely appreciate your thoughts and consideration! Trisha
On-Page Optimization | | lzhao0 -
Testing page load speed
Anyone have a recommendation for a simple way to measure page load speed?
On-Page Optimization | | dschreib_greenpeace.org0 -
Framed Pages and Dynamic Pages
Has anyone else had experience with different CMS's for Ecommerce . Ones that create static pages and others that dynamically create pages. What differences have you seen with rankings on google with the two. Here are two examples of sites using static framed pages and one with a system that dynamically creates pages - http://www.gardeningexpress.co.uk/ - static frames and http://www.floraselect.co.uk - dynamically
On-Page Optimization | | onlinemediadirect0