The Energon Pub

News Credits: 3647 · Wed Jan 30, 2008 3:10 pm

For those of you using Internet Explorer, you should have your "temporary internet files set to store copies of webpages, images and media for faster viewing later" set to "Automatically".

News Credits: 3647 · Wed Jan 30, 2008 3:12 pm

GetterDragun wrote:I get the page load to say they are fast, but the page it self takes sometimes more than a minute to dsplay.

More than a minute? It shouldn't take longer than a few seconds for the browser to render the page.

News Credits: 1 · Wed Jan 30, 2008 4:00 pm

including this page which loaded in 55.62403 seconds

firefox 2. something and I didn't have any other windows open or applications running.

News Credits: 150 · Wed Jan 30, 2008 4:09 pm

Seibertron wrote:
GetterDragun wrote:I get the page load to say they are fast, but the page it self takes sometimes more than a minute to dsplay.

More than a minute? It shouldn't take longer than a few seconds for the browser to render the page.

My page load times vary from .1 second to 11 second. What I do is usually right click --> open in new window multiple forums at the same time, and that often makes excruciatingly long (but I can do this on other forums, no problem). What I experience is the background will load, then eventually I get the Decepticon logo and the planet, then the waiting begins and finally the forum actually loads. But I often associate this with the site being down or somethings.

Today is much better though with the page displaying in less than 10 seconds, so for me it is a huge difference.

News Credits: 972 · Wed Jan 30, 2008 5:50 pm

I run Firefox tabbed browsing on crappy Australian ADSL speed connection (both at home and work), and I must admit that I have never really experienced the slow down that many others have. The site is slightly faster on average now, especially on pic heavy threads.

The back-end however has speed up enormously Ryan, which is great, no more waiting for 3 minutes to approve a news story!

News Credits: 8 · Wed Jan 30, 2008 5:56 pm

The speed is the same for me, but it's never been slow.

What I have noticed in the past day are so is that sporaticly the layout of the control panel and posting pages change layout.

One second the smileys will be on the side, the next above the post window, and so on and so on...

Is it a glimpse of whats to come, or should I kick my machine?

Either way...

News Credits: 2 · Thu Jan 31, 2008 3:01 am

0.08998 seconds. :shock:

Not bad for NZ's crappy "broadband", mind you I'm using Firefox with the Fasterfox add-on installed, so i don't know how that would affect the above count.

News Credits: 2 · Thu Jan 31, 2008 10:08 am

There is a little differnece between HMW and the forum.

HMW: which loaded in 2.73383 seconds.
Forum: which loaded in 0.13854 seconds.

Though in comparison to some of the times I've seen this is much better.

Thu Jan 31, 2008 10:18 am

0.09831 seconds

News Credits: 3 · Thu Jan 31, 2008 3:52 pm

Seibertron wrote:
Robinson wrote:My work won't upgrade to ie7 for a while, am I going to be screwed on the site?

Unless your company's server admin knows how to prevent the update, Microsoft is going to force the update on all computers. I'm not sure if "force" means that IE6 will no longer be operable or the next time you do a Windows Update it makes you download IE7 or what.

That seems to be the most likely option, considering most companies have techs who know how to prevent Microsoft from updating IE versions. There are already sites on the 'net that IE6 apparently doesn't "recognize" (like ACToys, for one.)

Another way Microsoft can force companies and organizations to upgrade to IE7 is through computer purchases. From what I've heard, there will apparently no way to buy a computer, outside of building one yourself or at a physical store, without Vistas (which I presumes comes with IE7).

News Credits: 1 · Thu Jan 31, 2008 4:33 pm

Of course, you'd think any IT tech saavy enough to block the IE7 update would be saavy enough to realize that's a bad idea. Let's see... better security, better/faster rendering, more features that make browsing easier... why would you keep IE6?

And no, I don't buy "to keep the company intranet functioning". If you're dumb enough to code your website in such a way that only one browser/OS can read it, then I don't feel sorry for you having to clean up your mistake when you find out you can't keep your computers stagnant forever.

News Credits: 972 · Thu Jan 31, 2008 7:47 pm

Jeysie wrote:Of course, you'd think any IT tech saavy enough to block the IE7 update would be saavy enough to realize that's a bad idea. Let's see... better security, better/faster rendering, more features that make browsing easier... why would you keep IE6?

I keep it at work so I can use our crappy software that is not compatible with IE7. I'm sure many companies who use small 3rd party software have to do the same.

News Credits: 1 · Thu Jan 31, 2008 8:40 pm

i_amtrunks wrote:I keep it at work so I can use our crappy software that is not compatible with IE7. I'm sure many companies who use small 3rd party software have to do the same.

Weird. Why would any software be incompatible with something non-OS-integral like a web browser? (I don't even have IE installed on my home computer at all.)

News Credits: 972 · Thu Jan 31, 2008 10:15 pm

Jeysie wrote:
i_amtrunks wrote:I keep it at work so I can use our crappy software that is not compatible with IE7. I'm sure many companies who use small 3rd party software have to do the same.

Weird. Why would any software be incompatible with something non-OS-integral like a web browser? (I don't even have IE installed on my home computer at all.)

It's a web editing WYSIWYG, thus totally reliant on the standard web browser at the time of it's release.

That and it's a poopy program.

Fri Feb 01, 2008 11:46 am

o great.....it's down again.........

Sat Feb 02, 2008 9:58 pm

0.11629 seconds

im the fastes on the first page

News Credits: 1 · Sun Feb 03, 2008 12:48 am

Wheelimus Prime wrote:0.11629 seconds

im the fastes on the first page

"Ha HA, Your position has been usurped, that's right I said usurped"

Nelson from the Simpsons.

Mine loaded in 0.114 seconds and I was also running MSN messenger at the time.

Just joking of course but yes the site does seem faster, I'm on DSL.

Sun Feb 03, 2008 11:05 am

***Galvatron*** wrote:
Wheelimus Prime wrote:0.11629 seconds

im the fastes on the first page

"Ha HA, Your position has been usurped, that's right I said usurped"
Nelson from the Simpsons.

Mine loaded in 0.114 seconds and I was also running MSN messenger at the time.

Just joking of course but yes the site does seem faster, I'm on DSL.

0.12882 seconds you win this round but ill get you next time :twisted:

News Credits: 6 · Sun Feb 03, 2008 12:35 pm

0.1515 seconds. Perfectly reasonable for me!

News Credits: 2 · Sun Feb 03, 2008 3:39 pm

We got some speedy ones then POOF.

Seibertron.com in the past 15 minutes including this page which loaded in 115.06022 seconds.

Sun Feb 03, 2008 3:52 pm

106.79706 seconds. and 1.73417 seconds

dang and it was going so well :-(

News Credits: 6 · Sun Feb 03, 2008 4:10 pm

Just got 0.9 and 1.2

Before that, I had to reload seibertron.com

News Credits: 668 · Mon Feb 04, 2008 6:52 am

A little sluggish in spots, but nothing like it has been. I've seen worse, so whatever you're doing that's correcting the problem, please keep doing it.

News Credits: 3 · Mon Feb 04, 2008 12:53 pm

The site itself is running better for me.

"There have been a total of 3,838 pages viewed on Seibertron.com in the past 15 minutes including this page which loaded in 0.12731 seconds."

I've noticed, for me anyways, it seems like sometimes the site loads and then hangs briefly right while the ads load.