Huh. Tried PageSpeed, a tool from Google on how to make your website more responsive. I have five websites I currently maintain. The ones I wrote myself: 90, 86, 82. The two that use off-the-shelf templates: 68, 46.
I'm not surprised. I'm fairly good at what I do. :-).
One of my pages scored a 70, for not optimizing the freshness lifetime of several images. In this case, the lifetime not being specified at all. It never occurred to me to set an expiration period for images that never change. (not in 5yrs anyway)
This really does not affect how fast my page loads, as much as how much faster it might -reload- at a later time...
"High priority. These suggestions represent the largest potential performance wins for the least development effort. However, there are no high priority suggestions for this site. Good job!"
I also got the lack-of-freshness-lifetime for images.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
no subject
Date: 2011-04-01 02:54 am (UTC)One of my pages scored a 70, for not optimizing the freshness lifetime of several images. In this case, the lifetime not being specified at all. It never occurred to me to set an expiration period for images that never change. (not in 5yrs anyway)
This really does not affect how fast my page loads, as much as how much faster it might -reload- at a later time...
no subject
Date: 2011-04-01 05:32 am (UTC)"High priority. These suggestions represent the largest potential performance wins for the least development effort. However, there are no high priority suggestions for this site. Good job!"
I also got the lack-of-freshness-lifetime for images.
no subject
Date: 2011-04-01 05:39 am (UTC)