quick! how long did it take for my blog page to open?!
April 2nd, 2008 @ 11:01 am
while looking up some stats for craig, i stumbled across this:
DAAANG.
and that is only from 01 january 08, 12:00 AM to 02 april 08, 10:57 am. only three full months! at the end of the year, we would have waited almost 31 billion hours for websites to download!
the internet is great. but snap, we may be a little too obsessed.
what do you think?
Dangit · Tech
Crystal Renaud said,
April 2, 2008 at 11:06 am
sounds like we’re wasting a lot of time just waiting around for someone else’s work to use for our benefit.
Brad Ruggles said,
April 2, 2008 at 11:07 am
Loaded nice and quick for me.
But I’m sure I wasted hundreds of hours waiting for pages to load back in the good ol’ days of dial-up.
Click the link…grab a coke from the fridge…read a magazine article…check back to see if it’s loaded…
Thank God for high-speed Internet!!
Brad Ruggles
http://www.bradruggles.com
bob said,
April 2, 2008 at 11:09 am
fasterfox says 3.393 seconds for me.
Apprise (an AIR feed reader) is usually how i read your blog. Your page load was nice and quick tho.
Chad Maag said,
April 2, 2008 at 11:11 am
While I will wholeheartedly agree that culturally we have become obsessed with the internet. I like many of us get a certain pavlovian rush when new content appears in my RSS feed, or a new image is posted in a friends flickr feed.
I think the amount of time has less to do with web obsession and more to do with poorly coded sites. Bloat has become so prevalent, most pointedly on blog sites (what with the myriad widgets you can load on a blog - loswhit I’m talking to you), and less than stellar hosting.
If every web site admin focused on just shaving a few seconds off of the time it takes to load their site, that can add up to a tremendous amount of time saved.
steven.russell said,
April 2, 2008 at 11:11 am
Might I encourage those who haven’t…
If you are going to be spending time waiting on the internet, spend some time by clicking on those blue banners over there and saving a child’s life.
How many kids could be saved in 7.7 million hours?
Connor Mccullough said,
April 2, 2008 at 11:12 am
your page loaded very quickly, i study a bit of web design and multimedia as part of my degree at uni, and a web page should load in under 4 secs or you can forget people reading it
Anne Jackson said,
April 2, 2008 at 11:13 am
steven russell, i love you right now. :) in an appropriate, non-romantic, completely phileo kind of way. :)
Chad Maag said,
April 2, 2008 at 11:16 am
heh heh, didn’t answer the question, took about 2-3 seconds for me.
John Ireland said,
April 2, 2008 at 11:22 am
loaded in under three seconds…:)
rightly or wrongly, i am not too patient with long page-load times. i’ll usually just abandon the attempt and try another time.
lorijo said,
April 2, 2008 at 12:22 pm
3 seconds…
that is pretty scary. a lot of time a wasted.
tony said,
April 2, 2008 at 1:11 pm
steven russell - excellent words. there have been several kids sponsored by anne’s faithful blog following - people on the internet.
internet good vs internet evil is here to stay.
kudos to anne (and the new sponsors) for using tech to save lives and to LC and many others using the internet to save lives and souls!
Andy McMahon said,
April 2, 2008 at 1:29 pm
I don’t know how much time I have spent waiting for webpages to load, but I am sure it’s a dangerous amount of time. In my defense, I feel I am normally doing other things as well… like.. aww heck who am I kidding. We’re obsessed!
Linda Sue said,
April 2, 2008 at 2:52 pm
I am spending way too much time messing around online - slow loading sites make me itch - I love Pioneer Woman but her site can take semi forever (I realize server loads, graphics, cruddy connections all make a difference). Guess I’m grateful I don’t have small children crying at my feet - I might feel guiltier and I’m a poster child for guilt as it is!
allen said,
April 2, 2008 at 4:58 pm
Anne and Steven, nine zeros is billions. Sorry, I’m an anal former engineer :)
Anne Jackson said,
April 2, 2008 at 7:35 pm
Thanks allen…I’m a writer. :)
Phil Thompson said,
April 2, 2008 at 9:00 pm
Not fast enough when it comes to reading your blogs! : )
steven.russell said,
April 2, 2008 at 10:23 pm
Yeah. So see. Even more kids could be saved by 7.7 billion.
Sheri said,
April 2, 2008 at 11:33 pm
that’s insane! How many of those waiting moments will be counted as idle chatter or idle/wasted time in heaven? :O) That’s what I wonder…
Pete Wilson said,
April 3, 2008 at 9:15 pm
Holy Cow. That’s a lot of time.