Download time

by =?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Alberto=2E=B7=2EVallini=22?= <vallinis(at)>

 Date:  Sun, 10 Sep 2000 00:33:50 +0200
 To:  hwg-techniques(at)
  todo: View Thread, Original
In response to: ***1) I know 35 seconds is long, but is it that long?=20
What's the opinion out there? Is my client completely off base, or should I=
go back to me
drawing board?***

It depends on the surfer, methinks. To me 35 seconds is pretty fine and not=
outrageous at all: you must consider that normally I never browse with one=
single window but I browse with 3 or 4 process on the run so waiting don't=
really bother me. I can switch window in the meanwhile.
Many users do like this and once you're experienced as an user also 60=20
seconds of waiting is not excessive (I'm here reporting my feeling as a=20
If your surfer does not practice multiple browsing and goes straight to=20
your site, I assume he/she has a reason and that what spurs him/her is=20
worth while 35 seconds in his/her evaluation.
I think when we say 35 seconds is too long maybe we mostly imply 35 seconds=
on one single window with a stark blank page with the loading on process:=20
but if something appears, I can well wait my 35 or even more seconds if I=20
have some interest in what I'm searching for.
All these issues will be magically solved in a remote future when we will=20
finally have widespread low fare high speed connections (I hear rumors=20
about 2million kb per second once a year at least... disappointing indeed)

As for your client, the perennial drama between the technical necessities=20
and the scarce knowledge of the issue by the client, is here once again. I=
would not blame the client, but he should be explained that if he wants=20
certain kind of things that for instance may be achieved only thorugh=20
images or maps, there is nothing to complain about if it takes 35 seconds,=
which is anyway an average time between the 8 seconds of yahoo (hey guys=20
yahoo loads much faster on that side of the pond eh, LOL) and the 60 or 90=

Technically, and I hope I won't be eaten alive as it's just my two cents,=20
if you have heavy contents and files, better use tables: normally browsers=
start displaying something as soon as they meet the FIRST NOT NESTED=20
closing </table> tag. This means that if at the top page you format your=20
layout within a table, or at most a couple of nested tables (yeah ya know=20
images are not "tabular data" *giggling*), with a few images, the last=20
closing outer table tag will be reached almost immediately: this will=20
provide the user with the first contents: images in it may not appear (if=20
any) yet as might be loading, but the user will start seeing something:=20
this might entice him/her as it's evidence his/her painful efforts were not=
in vain eheh.

good luck!

Alberto.=B7.Vallini  - vallinis(at)
"when everything else fails, sleep"

Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free (at) address at

HWG hwg-techniques mailing list archives, maintained by Webmasters @ IWA