Our regular video series How Fast Is…? examines real world websites and details the cause of their performances issues as well as what should be done to solve them. After all, the best way to learn about front-end web performance is to see what other people are doing right and doing wrong. In this edition of How Fast Is…? we analyze the TechCrunch Disrupt.
TechCrunch Disrupt is a popular tech conference put on by TechCrunch which showcases startups and investors. Sadly the website is one of the slowest websites we have ever analyzed. This is really odd, given that TechCrunch’s main tech news website is a really fast site. In this video explore the performance problems and how they can be fixed.
Know a site we should make a video about? Contact us and you may see a future episode about it.
Hi Billy!
I really like your video series, but one thing a always stumble upon. On the main page of the analysis is says very prominently “Conversative Bandwidth Savings”. Shouldn’t that read “Conservative Bandwidth Savings”?
Kind regards,
Markus
HAHA! Yes it should. I’ll add that to the bug list for for next Sunday roll out. Our recent Changelog is here: http://zoompfchangelog.tumblr.com/
I’m heavily into web-optimization and can never get enough, looking forward to checking out your choices. I’d submit mine but it’s been some time since I found a way to speed it up much (and it’s on godaddy shared still!)
“This is really odd, given that TechCrunch’s main tech news website is a really fast site.”
Really? You must use a different website than I do apparently.. Especially with all these crappy, slow 3rd party buttons (yes including Facebook’s and Google’s..)
I ran your service and got that one High Quality JPEG Image issue where its size could be lowered from 7,965b to 6,279 (21.168%). I’ve tried to reduce it’s size with smush.it service and it ended up with 0.2% improvement.
I’m interested what alghoritm/program for compression are you using for comparison?
I would also like to make a remark about score and issue severity rating due to one of the results which is classified as high impact issue:
- Unoptimized Image (PNG): 6,707 (orig) 6,673 (opt) saving = 0.507%
You should change the severity of issue according to % or used bandwidth (which would be good for small files where % can be considerably larger).
In your face TC, my little website is better:
- Zoompf Score: 79
- Conservative Bandwidth Savings: 13.3%
- Aggressive Bandwidth Savings: 14.4%
P.S.: Your comment form is a bit confusing regarding fields since the field description is bellow and closer to the next field.