Page length

Page length was created by David Aiketgate

Posted 12 years 11 months ago #33719
There has been a couple of enquiries that I've had about the length of the post page ie 5 posts per page.
People with a slow broadband speed feel that more posts per page would speed up their interface experience, timewise ( :unsure: ;)

What's the general consensus? Is 5 too few, would ten be better;or more, less? Please let us know here. :thumbsup:

David
:shrug:

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Replied by rog1963 on topic Re: Page length

Posted 12 years 11 months ago #33724
Six of one; half a dozen....
If the thread is mainly of text, then more posts per page would be helpful. But where threads are made up of pictures then less is helpful. i.e. If a thread reaches, say, 20 posts and you have a page of 20 posts of pictures it can take a while to load them all; whereas if you only have 5 per page you can skip to the relevant page if you've already read previous posts without the need to load them all. Hope this makes sense.
By the way ... Im getting 140 ks download at the moment and it all seems to work fine for me at the moment.
by rog1963
The following user(s) said Thank You: Leigh Ping

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Replied by Red Devil on topic Re: Page length

Posted 12 years 11 months ago #33725
I think more per page would be nice it would make things a bit quicker. :)
The following user(s) said Thank You: David Aiketgate

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Replied by David Aiketgate on topic Re: Page length

Posted 12 years 11 months ago #33726
That's just the sort of feed back we need. :broon:

What sort of page loading speeds are you experiencing at 140k Rog?

David
:shrug:

Last Edit:12 years 11 months ago by David Aiketgate
Last edit: 12 years 11 months ago by David Aiketgate.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Replied by rog1963 on topic Re: Page length

Posted 12 years 11 months ago #33731

David Aiketgate wrote: That's just the sort of feed back we need. :broon:

What sort of page loading speeds are you experiencing at 140k Rog?


Now you're asking. How do I measure loading speeds?
by rog1963

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Replied by David Aiketgate on topic Re: Page length

Posted 12 years 11 months ago #33738

rog1963 wrote:

David Aiketgate wrote: That's just the sort of feed back we need. :broon:

What sort of page loading speeds are you experiencing at 140k Rog?


Now you're asking. How do I measure loading speeds?


Just click on any thread and time how long it takes to completely load onto your computer. :thumbsup:

David
:shrug:

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Replied by adamelphick on topic Re: Page length

Posted 12 years 11 months ago #33739
As said it all depends on the content. I have to say that The T Bar is MUCH slower than a certain other forum that will remain nameless unfortunately - however our layout is MUCH NICER. It's all about perception I guess - If someone wants to see what we have they will wait the few seconds for it to appear.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Leigh Ping

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Replied by Red Devil on topic Re: Page length

Posted 12 years 11 months ago #33740

David Aiketgate wrote:

rog1963 wrote:

David Aiketgate wrote: That's just the sort of feed back we need. :broon:

What sort of page loading speeds are you experiencing at 140k Rog?


Now you're asking. How do I measure loading speeds?


Just click on any thread and time how long it takes to completely load onto your computer. :thumbsup:


6 seconds for me.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Replied by Red Devil on topic Re: Page length

Posted 12 years 11 months ago #33742

adamelphick wrote: As said it all depends on the content. I have to say that The T Bar is MUCH slower than a certain other forum that will remain nameless unfortunately - however our layout is MUCH NICER. It's all about perception I guess - If someone wants to see what we have they will wait the few seconds for it to appear.


It is not how quickly you can get there that counts but how good it is when you get there :thumbsup:

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Replied by rog1963 on topic Re: Page length

Posted 12 years 11 months ago #33743
Okay. I tried it on page 3 of the 'arty farty' thread (as there are several pictures there). Took approx 40 secs. But second time was a lot quicker, I assume because I have cookies enabled.
by rog1963

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Replied by David Aiketgate on topic Re: Page length

Posted 12 years 11 months ago #33745

rog1963 wrote: Okay. I tried it on page 3 of the 'arty farty' thread (as there are several pictures there). Took approx 40 secs. But second time was a lot quicker, I assume because I have cookies enabled.

Please try another new page to see which was the correct load time. 40 secs is a long time.

David
:shrug:

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Replied by rog1963 on topic Re: Page length

Posted 12 years 11 months ago #33746
David; you tend to post larger file size photos than most and yours do tend to load slowly for me. I've just tried page 13 of the Invasion Scotland thread and it loaded for about 50 secs and then stopped altogether with quite a lot of photos only half loaded.
by rog1963

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Time to create page: 0.543 seconds