Web Bloat Score Calculator
-
Web Bloat Score Calculator[^]:
Compare size of a page to a compressed image of the same page
The article is rather interesting, but the calculator itself meh... not so much... It's indeed an interesting and original approach, I'll give him that, but the formula for WebBS (or B$ :D) is just too simplistic to have any actual meaning. I mean the used fonts, elements spacing, etc. on some page can have a major impact on calculated result and I don't consider that to be relevant to page's bloatedness. I was hoping that the result would detect for example the website's size inflation that occurred due to an underused JS and CSS framework(s) and thus indicate that they should be removed on that website. I believe that the formula needs more work for it to be useful... for example it could take the total amount of web requests, that were send for a measuring page, into account. However, that would probably be unfair as well, because typically you do not bundle some requests to leverage the cache or CDN ... Nevertheless, I did like the thin vs the fat tribe story.
-
Web Bloat Score Calculator[^]:
Compare size of a page to a compressed image of the same page
The article is rather interesting, but the calculator itself meh... not so much... It's indeed an interesting and original approach, I'll give him that, but the formula for WebBS (or B$ :D) is just too simplistic to have any actual meaning. I mean the used fonts, elements spacing, etc. on some page can have a major impact on calculated result and I don't consider that to be relevant to page's bloatedness. I was hoping that the result would detect for example the website's size inflation that occurred due to an underused JS and CSS framework(s) and thus indicate that they should be removed on that website. I believe that the formula needs more work for it to be useful... for example it could take the total amount of web requests, that were send for a measuring page, into account. However, that would probably be unfair as well, because typically you do not bundle some requests to leverage the cache or CDN ... Nevertheless, I did like the thin vs the fat tribe story.
Fun article. I checked my site, and it came out at 1.1. I didn't like that, so I messed around a little (without changing any graphics), and got it down to 0.694 -- not too bad, considering I pre-load all the graphics. So it's a useful tool for making me not be lazy. CP varies (I saw a range of 1.65 to 1.9), but that's not surprising, because the content (and the advertising) changes.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
-
Fun article. I checked my site, and it came out at 1.1. I didn't like that, so I messed around a little (without changing any graphics), and got it down to 0.694 -- not too bad, considering I pre-load all the graphics. So it's a useful tool for making me not be lazy. CP varies (I saw a range of 1.65 to 1.9), but that's not surprising, because the content (and the advertising) changes.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
Among others, I tested out my CP article (Find and Replace text in a Word document) and got ~2.5 [^], I was expecting worse because of this introduction image. When optimized that image can be reduced by ~62%. Also, I seen that the calculator's page has a nice score of 0.394. Looking at its web request logs it seems it minified everything, including HTML, CSS, JS and icon font (Font Awesome). I sure would like to know how was that done, I mean just the icon font part (the rest are common)?
-
Web Bloat Score Calculator[^]:
Compare size of a page to a compressed image of the same page
The article is rather interesting, but the calculator itself meh... not so much... It's indeed an interesting and original approach, I'll give him that, but the formula for WebBS (or B$ :D) is just too simplistic to have any actual meaning. I mean the used fonts, elements spacing, etc. on some page can have a major impact on calculated result and I don't consider that to be relevant to page's bloatedness. I was hoping that the result would detect for example the website's size inflation that occurred due to an underused JS and CSS framework(s) and thus indicate that they should be removed on that website. I believe that the formula needs more work for it to be useful... for example it could take the total amount of web requests, that were send for a measuring page, into account. However, that would probably be unfair as well, because typically you do not bundle some requests to leverage the cache or CDN ... Nevertheless, I did like the thin vs the fat tribe story.
weather.com is 12.6. Is that bad? :-\
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
-
weather.com is 12.6. Is that bad? :-\
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
It's hard to tell weather it is bad or not.
-
It's hard to tell weather it is bad or not.
-
Web Bloat Score Calculator[^]:
Compare size of a page to a compressed image of the same page
The article is rather interesting, but the calculator itself meh... not so much... It's indeed an interesting and original approach, I'll give him that, but the formula for WebBS (or B$ :D) is just too simplistic to have any actual meaning. I mean the used fonts, elements spacing, etc. on some page can have a major impact on calculated result and I don't consider that to be relevant to page's bloatedness. I was hoping that the result would detect for example the website's size inflation that occurred due to an underused JS and CSS framework(s) and thus indicate that they should be removed on that website. I believe that the formula needs more work for it to be useful... for example it could take the total amount of web requests, that were send for a measuring page, into account. However, that would probably be unfair as well, because typically you do not bundle some requests to leverage the cache or CDN ... Nevertheless, I did like the thin vs the fat tribe story.
I would like to see rankings based on rendering times on a 10 year old client. It drives me nuts when I come across a website so full of Javascript goodness that it is a slow as muck, resulting in it being unusable. With response times of the order of 30 seconds to basic UI interactions, it means that your start to enter some text when suddenly the web page reloads with something completely different, as there was an extra mouse click buffered somewhere. Its particularly annoying when the page could just as easily have been implemented in good old fashion CGI, but was implemented using AJAX for trendiness reasons.
