Google’s algorithm on file size. Use IFrame or not?
-
With page size being a big factor in Google’s algorithm what’s the best way to implement a flash file without jeopardizing rankings? What’s your thoughts on embedding the video in an IFrame?
-
What we're trying to do specifically is use a flash video as a product image, so the size increase will be significant. We're talking somewhere around 1.5 - 2mb on a page that is about 400kb before the video. So the increase is significant. This is why the concern, and why we were thinking perhaps having the flash video inside an iframe might overcome the speed issues.
Google often talks about doing the best user experience and the SEO will follow, but the two seem conflicting, as we're trying to provide a better experience with the video, but the increase in page size, and therefore speed, will be significant. The rest of the page will load, including a fallback static image, so we're really trying to understand how to mitigate the page load speed impact of the video.
-
Any additional feedback is appreciated
-
I agree with Adam that site speed although announced as a factor probably isn't a large one.
Also agree that embedding the flash normally is better than an iframe.
If worried about the size factor then should look to minimise the file size or look to see if other more search engine friendly solutions e.g jQuery may be possible (obviously this depends on what the flash content is)
-
I can't give you a definitive answer, but I can offer some input regarding page speed.
As far as I can tell (and see) page speed is NOT a big factor in Google's algorithm, but a minor one. Google and Matt Cutts have both stressed that it is less important than other factors, and that "fewer than 1% of search queries will change as a result of incorporating site speed into our ranking".
I'm not saying you shouldn't pay attention to site speed, but don't stress about it, as it's not one of the biggest factors.
I would shy away from using an iframe for a couple reasons, including a) Google is starting to read flash and b) using a iframe could look a little suspicious.
Hope this helps!
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
-
Google.com country redirection
As we all know, Google redirected the user based on location automatically.
Image & Video Optimization | | Moojin
e.g., connect to www.google.com from Korea, google automatically redirected to www.google.co.kr
However, for sometimes I noticed that if I connect to www.google.com, it doesn't redirect to local google anymore. I tested by using VPN, and seems like Google no longer do location redirection. Does anyone have any idea about this?0 -
What (Local SEO) NAP to use when your country doesn't use Suite #s?
New Zealand does some good things, for example we grow hairy fruit called Kiwifruit, put other fruit into bottles and call it Sauvignon Blanc, but we can also be a bit, well...fruity. My problem is that when we Kiwis list out NAPs we do it like this: ABC Company, Level 1, 123 Example St. Now the fruity bit is we don't have Suite #s, there is never: ABC Company, Suite #400 Level 1, 123 Example St. We just expect you to go up to level 1 and bl@ody well find the office thanks very much (yea there are signs). It seems like a Local SEO shared office situation but it's the whole floor! I'm worried if I get an office in an office building then I will have my results merged with Extremely-Boring-Accountant and Angry-Lawyer who happen to be on the same level. What's a Local SEO aware guy to do?
Image & Video Optimization | | BruceMcG0 -
How to build links with really good S3 hosted video using JW Player
I have a number of really good quality videos that are embedded on my own site. Many are "how to" or "what to do if" type video guides with questions answered by experts. They were professionally shot. So that I could reap the full SEO benefit from the videos, I have them hosted via Amazon S3 and am using an embedded JW Player. We have a video sitemap and, as a result, most of the videos have already been indexed by Google and are showing up in Google video search as residing on our webpage. Now the real problem is how to get some link benefit from them. They should be viable and valuable link bait. My initial thought was to do a PR Web type press release with the video embedded in it. The problem with that is that you are limited to Youtube and Vimeo embedded video which defeats that purpose entirely. PR Newswire has different issues but the end result is the same, I can't embed those videos with them either. As far as I can tell, all I could do with a press release would be to link to the videos. Moreover, I don't even know that press releases would be that valuable in the post penguin world but the hope was that people would share the videos naturally. So, I put it to the experts. Does anyone have any suggestions as to how to get some link benefit from these videos? Any ideas at all? I am stumped. Any advice would be appreciated.
Image & Video Optimization | | LawSEOSeeker0 -
How do I get my site to rank in Google Videos?
I have a site that has quite a few videos. When I do a search from Google video's using keywords for our site, the site is not listed with the video site although it is listed with the html site. So how do I get Google to recognize that the site has all the videos. eg google video search with keywords: social media "damon adachi" website: biztvcanada.com Thanks Janice
Image & Video Optimization | | jwdavis0 -
Image Duplicates - Does Google Penalize on this?
Hi Mozzers, I have some doubts on the images hosted on my site. I have a single image on the website coming from 3 different locations. The locations are: img.mydomain.com/site/default/serivces.jpg img1.mydomain.com/site/default/serivces.jpg www.mydomain.com/site/default/serivces.jpg Now, these 3 are the same images with the same Title (they currently do not have an Alt Tag). Now, the 2 sub-domains when opened without any internal URL, redirects to the main domain. For instance, if I access img.mydomain.com it 301 redirects to www.mydomain.com but if I access img.mydomain.com/site/default/serivces.jpg I will get the image and it does not redirect. I have checked Google Image search and the full path on the sub-domain of the image is being indexed and crawled by Google Image bot. Now, this is true for both the sub-domains which act as CDN for the images. If Google does crawl all the locations which have the same image, does it cause a duplicate issue for it? I know that if it was content, I would be in trouble but does image also has the same implications. I am planning for image optimization and faced with this situation. Any answers? Cheers,
Image & Video Optimization | | RanjeetP0 -
Local SEO Issue: Google Places Listing on Page 8
Hello, I'm having an issue with a client's Google Places listing. It's showing on page 8 for one of the main keyword terms but their main site is on page 1. Having looked into competitors' places listings ranking above, I've ruled out the following; lack of citations inconsistent citations incomplete profile incorrect category listing details not matching places landing page incorrect location and any form of keyword stuffing Other places listings ranking above have fewer citations, incomplete profiles, details inconsistent with their main site, one is no longer trading as a business and one has no website! In the past, our client had had two listings simultaneously but we addressed this waaaay back. Is it possible we could still be getting punished? I'm at a bit of a loss otherwise. Any thoughts would be hugely appreciated. Thankyou!
Image & Video Optimization | | jasarrow0 -
Google Places - Category Question
Hi All. Just wanted to double check something with you folks. I've always been under the impression that you should complete the first category option in Places with a default category from Google's list of options, followed by 4 categories of your choice. However, does the 1st category need to be a default option or can it be any one of the 5? Also, do you think anything is gained in the rankings by adding a category of your own choice as the 1st category? There's nothing in the Quality guidelines that suggests the 1st category needs to be a default option, so I thought I'd throw this out there... http://www.google.com/support/places/bin/answer.py?answer=107528
Image & Video Optimization | | PerchDigital0 -
Google Place pages and regular listings in search results
I'm trying to clarify something about search results which contain local listings. Here is the search string for Google that will give you the same results that I am seeing - http://www.google.co.uk/search?&q=letting agents glasgow&pws=0 Of the results that are returned, some of them have data which seems to be related to their Google Place page but the "title" links directly to their website. What I wanted to know is, "Is it their actual website that has given them those rankings" or "Are they listed where they are because of a well optimized and ranked Places page?
Image & Video Optimization | | XSMedia0