One of the biggest problems facing the Internet is throughput (how fast you get the web info you requested). Many Internet experts warn that the unprecedented popularity of the Internet may choke the very goose that laid the golden egg. We at BusinessWare feel we have an obligation to address the root of the problem, which only web developers like us can address. If you read on, we can also show how it is good business to do so.
Most of you have noticed the status bar of your browser telling you that you are receiving web info at under 1000 bytes/sec. How is this possible after you paid big bucks for your high-speed modem?
The problem is usually graphics - all too often gratuitous clipart, expansive logos, impressive background images, and now cute pictures dancing around thanks to Java. Consider that this letter "a" could be sent from a web page as a single character or as a collection of dozens of pixels in the form of a graphics image. That is what makes graphics expensive in terms of your wasted time.
You could throw money at faster modems and other connections, but most website transfer rates are determined by how fast the webserver computer can dish out the web page info. If a busy website has a few dozen users clicking on links and requesting information, the webserver puts such requests in a que and parcels out pieces of info to each user. That is why your browser seems to fall asleep and then leap forward now and then to update your screen. Your souped-up modem is a sports car at a red light. The common solution to this is for the webmaster to buy another webserver computer so each webserver services fewer users. Since this sets back webmasters $5K, you can understand how they would like to put this off.
The only viable solution is to use graphics effectively. This doesn't mean we forego graphics. We do have a picture of our office building so you can recognize it in traffic, and our mug shots so you know more of whom you're talking to. But, we do have guidelines that recognize the penalty of making our customers wait.
Here are the ones we use, and we encourage end users and other webmasters to consider them:
| Web users | Webmasters and web development customers |
Do not equate impressive websites with wall-to-wall graphics. Rather, equate impressive websites with high value provided to the end user. Turn "Options/Autoload images" off in Netscape (other browsers give you similar preference options). When you see the icon for an image that interests you, load only that image by clicking your right mouse button. If you come across a web page that forces you to load gratuitous graphics to navigate their content, send an email message to the webmaster. |
Make every picture work. Look at the layout of your local newspaper. There are pictures, graphics, and a logo, but every one of them do something important. Test your work regularly outside of your self-contained development environment. If you get impatient browsing your own stuff with a 28.8K modem at peak usage, recognize that you have a problem. Once you determine what is the "call to action" of your web page, ie user gets on mailing list, places an order, etc., then make sure there is a simple fast track to get there from your home page. If you need graphics to present your entire message, make those side trips to web pages that link back to the main road. Every image should have an ALT tag telling the user what the image is (so they can browse with "Autoload images" off and load images selectively) and its KB file size (so they can determine if it's worth it). For huge images, provide a 5 KB thumbnail with a link to a separate page with the 300 KB monster in all its glory. If the image doesn't need color, go to black and white. If it's line art, save it as a gif file with the color depth set at 2 bits. Don't use graphics-only command options. There is always a tasteful way to let people jump to the page of their choice with graphics or text, ie instead of a fancy ISMAP image with three choices, use three small graphic command icons, each with an ALT tag. |
Why is it good business for webmasters to minimize graphics
pollution?
The effectiveness of a website is often measured by the number of hits per day. This doesn't consider how long a hit hung around, but how many of them came, got what they wanted (hopefully), and left. By reducing the time browsers must spend on your page admiring graphics, you can increase the number of users treated to your website. How many hits have you lost because the end user grew tired of the "waiting to connect" status line and clicked on the other guy on the Yahoo list?
More importantly, how many users have you lost going from your home page to the order form because they had a life outside of your web page?