Post your page loading times

Contributor ,
Apr 14, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Sure wish I could create a poll for this, but anyway...

Doesn't matter whether I have the customizing scripts enabled or not...GreaseMonkey and/or the Stylish add-on enabled or disabled. I turn AdBlock off or leave it on. Browser cache cleared, or loaded up with common AdobeForums elements.

Connecting with a robust Comcast cable connection, usually testing at about 6100 kbps for download speeds.

Most thread index pages take on average anywhere from 28 - 34 seconds to completely load for me.

A thread with no replies maybe 10 - 12 seconds.

Is anyone getting significantly faster speeds on similar connections?

S.D.A. wrote:


It's the same with any new large scale software roll out !

sorry, i've been involved in some large scale rollouts and if i rolled out software this borked i'd be looking for a job as soon as the rollback was finished...

Views

6.6K

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community Guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more

Post your page loading times

Contributor ,
Apr 14, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Sure wish I could create a poll for this, but anyway...

Doesn't matter whether I have the customizing scripts enabled or not...GreaseMonkey and/or the Stylish add-on enabled or disabled. I turn AdBlock off or leave it on. Browser cache cleared, or loaded up with common AdobeForums elements.

Connecting with a robust Comcast cable connection, usually testing at about 6100 kbps for download speeds.

Most thread index pages take on average anywhere from 28 - 34 seconds to completely load for me.

A thread with no replies maybe 10 - 12 seconds.

Is anyone getting significantly faster speeds on similar connections?

S.D.A. wrote:


It's the same with any new large scale software roll out !

sorry, i've been involved in some large scale rollouts and if i rolled out software this borked i'd be looking for a job as soon as the rollback was finished...

Views

6.6K

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community Guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
Apr 14, 2009 0
Contributor ,
Apr 14, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Wow.  Nothing that bad here.  I'm at work - I don't know what the actual connection is, but it's slower than my comcast cable at home.  It's definitely slower than the old forum, but not 30 seconds slow.  More like 8 (just counting in my head) for an index and 2-3 for a thread.

Stock install of Safari 4 beta, osx10.4, dual 2.7g5

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community Guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
Reply
Loading...
Apr 14, 2009 0
LEGEND ,
Apr 14, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

from Romania with a so called 5Mb/s connection i load about any page around here in about 4-5 seconds including main forum pages, this page, the home page, etc so i'd say there's something wrong on your end

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community Guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
Reply
Loading...
Apr 14, 2009 0
Enthusiast ,
Apr 14, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

My load times are all over the map just like with the WebCrossing forums.

I'm on a very fast Comcast cable system (20 mega-bit/sec burst rates!).

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community Guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
Reply
Loading...
Apr 14, 2009 0
Engaged ,
Apr 14, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Well, speedtest.net says this cable connection is 17Mbps down and 7.7 up, which is pretty fast. And a 32 response thread loads in about 5-6 seconds.

But web page "load times" are pretty hard to compare from computer to computer. There are just so many variables...

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community Guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
Reply
Loading...
Apr 14, 2009 0
Most Valuable Participant ,
Apr 14, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

It is difficult to compare, I agree. I use a cable connection and have just measured around 5000 kbps download speeds with PC Pitstop. I use an old and slow Mac with Firefox 2 and a new and fast Vista laptop with Explorer and find no noticeable differences in downloading these pages between the two machines.

Download times I get in either computer for the Forum Comments main page are typically between 10 and 15 seconds; and some times much slower, but never much faster. And I think this can be compared with the well less than one second normal download time of any page in the forums I had on both machines before the earthquake. And with the less than one second with my laptop on a much slower DSL connection.

I think nobody can say I am exagerating if I say that download times for these forums have increased noticeably. At least for me.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community Guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
Reply
Loading...
Apr 14, 2009 0
Most Valuable Participant ,
Apr 14, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Even something simple as placing a link in a message takes way too much time. Compare it to Gmail (yes, I know, different technologies and what not), where it happens the very moment you click on it...

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community Guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
Reply
Loading...
Apr 14, 2009 0
Guide ,
Apr 14, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

In the WebX forums, when they were functioning at their best, going from one thread to another one or replying to a post was as fast as changing channels on cable TV with a remote.  Never more than a fraction of a second.

Here, it's always more like when the WebX were experiencing slow-downs, before someone gave the servers a smart kick in the side.  At least a few seconds to load a page, and replying seems to take forever, as does editing a post.

To the actual delays, you have to add the time wasted going back to the top of a page because of the lack of breadcrumbs at the bottom, time wasted navigating to the last-read post in a thread, the slow typing in the reply box, etc.

I stand by my educated-guess determination that these new forums are about 30 times slower overall:

http://forums.adobe.com/thread/417383?tstart=60

After four [now nine] days of using the new Jive forums, I've come to the conclusion that I have dedicated about three times the usual amount of time to the Adobe forums and have accomplished less than one tenth of what I used to do in a similar amount of time. 

This works out to a ratio of 30 to 1 in terms of how much better the old forum format performed in comparison to what we've ended up with here so far.

I'm basing this calculation on the number of hours spent here since last Sunday versus the few satisfying threads I have been able to read as well as the remarkably little assistance I've been able to give.

These results are naturally somewhat skewed by such things as the proportionally inordinate amount of time spent in the Forum Comments forum as well as reading and commenting on forum complaints on the other forums I've visited, to wit:  Photoshop Macintosh, Bridge Macintosh, Camera Raw, DNG, Color Management, Photography, Typography, Type, Illustrator, InDesign and this Forum Comments forums.

While this is a conclusion based on my subjective use of the forums and will necessarily be different than what other users experience, it does give me a somewhat quantifiable measure of the magnitude of the problem as it affects me personally.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community Guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
Reply
Loading...
Apr 14, 2009 0
Participant ,
Apr 15, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

My $.02 CDN cents.

I think you guys are blowing smoke out yer arses. I have noticed no real difference in speed between either forums; Although I have to say that the webx forums would stall more so than JIVE ever has so far. We can expect glitches while the team irons out the kinks of course -- It's the same with any new large scale software roll out !

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community Guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
Reply
Loading...
Apr 15, 2009 0
Enthusiast ,
Apr 15, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

S.D.A. wrote:


It's the same with any new large scale software roll out !

sorry, i've been involved in some large scale rollouts and if i rolled out software this borked i'd be looking for a job as soon as the rollback was finished...

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community Guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
Reply
Loading...
Apr 15, 2009 0
LEGEND ,
Apr 15, 2009

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

i don't know about that, last "big" web software that i've tried out on day1 was Quake Live. On the first week of the open beta (so not even the full version) there was a queue in place to help against overloading the servers. It took about 3-4 hours of waiting in line just to log in and it would log you out after about half an hour of inactivity, fun times Without the queue i'm sure the servers would have melted from the load

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community Guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
Reply
Loading...
Apr 15, 2009 0