IMPORTANT – Please read and comment
- This topic has 24 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 21 years, 3 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
FOllowing a comment by Fatguy in another thread, I have created a new theme for this site for those of you (members) who have a slower connection. The pages will load faster because this theme (site template screen) does not have any graphics.
You can select the theme (called [b]SG-Light[/b]) by first selecting the [url=/html/user.php]My Account[/url] ink in the [b][color=violet]Main Menu[/color][/b]. Them click on the [url=/html/user.php?op=chgtheme]select theme[/url] link (or the icon) and finally select the [b]SG-Light[/b] theme.
From then on (or until you change it back again) your webpages will load without the Sad Geezer Theme Graphics. Give it a try, tell me what you think.
I will be producing a number of new themes over the next few weeks but more importantly, for those of you who are into designing themes or graphics, I can make available the html page so that you can have a go at designing one yourself. If you are interested, please email me.
In the meantime, please indicate what sort of theme YOU would like to see. [i](Note: the text colour and link colour, green boxes etc will stay the same as these conform to the SadGeezer corporate image).[/i] I could for instance, incorporate LEXX images for an SG LEXX theme, or a General Sci Fi theme or hell, anything you want!
What would you like to see?
Sad, it looks good. and is still screams as “SADGEEZER”
In fact it took me a minute to realize why the page had loaded so fast. 😀 It still has our look and feel.
I made an earlier post but deleted it as I figured no one would read it with my name as the last poster…..hehehehe….. 😳 .
In any case – I have access to for computers with dial-up and DSL – here are some findings:
P3/98/IE6/dial-up – 41 seconds load up for full page and 31 seconds for the simpler page.
P4/xp/IE6/DSL – 37-42 seconds load up for full page and 24 seconds for the simpler page.
P2/98/IE5/DSL – 29 seconds for full page and 16 seconds for simpler page…..WTF!
Three other sites I visit have load times of 10 seconds, 7 seconds and 4 seconds (for the 10,000 member extreamly complicated PC Guide web site).
I must assume the delay is partly the complexity of the page coupled with your server’s processor/soft wear/memory. So the only recourse (since you stated that you can not have a dedicated server) would be the simplified page. I navigate to my favorite forum by making it a favorite on Windows and simply going there.
Ok – this may help members to some degree but the slow loading page would remain for the lurkers.
Maurice
I tried it and didn’t really notice any difference in speed; the pages are still media rich (pics, some graphics, banner etc.). I have a cable connection and am using my wife’s much more powerful laptop at the moment so both themes load quite fast at the moment. There may be a fraction of a second difference. to be really fast the pages would have to be simplified more (of course one can always change one’s own internet setting to make it load faster).
Will be interesting to hear of the average time difference between themes for those with slower connection speeds.
[quote=”Fatguy”]In any case – I have access to for computers with dial-up and DSL – here are some findings:
P3/98/IE6/dial-up – 41 seconds load up for full page and 31 seconds for the simpler page.
P4/xp/IE6/DSL – 37-42 seconds load up for full page and 24 seconds for the simpler page.
P2/98/IE5/DSL – 29 seconds for full page and 16 seconds for simpler page…..WTF!
[/quote]
Interesting. [i]And VERY sad! That’s far too slow![/i]
P3/98/IE6/Cable – 8 seconds with the old (default) theme and 5 seconds with the simpler theme. All other pages load twice as fast because they don’t grab as much info from the databases as the main page. For instance, try clicking refrech now. On my pc the page takes just over 2 seconds to load. My PC is in the UK and the SG server is in the US.
It’s an interesting dilema, should I simplify the main page so that it loads faster but has less features (calendar, links blocks etc.)?
Should I make SG-Light the default theme for unregistered visitors?
Being a computer illiterate moron, I’m not sure I can bring much to this discussion. I have an extremely crappy dial up connection. I’m not sure how long Sad’s takes to load, but it does seem like it’s a long time. But then again, every site seems to take forever. 🙄
I will try out the SG Light and let you know what I think. It’s nice of you to offer options to those of us still living in the Dark Dialup Ages.
[quote=”streudel”]It’s nice of you to offer options to those of us still living in the Dark Dialup Ages.[/quote]
Some of us like the dial-up for the “wandering IP address” as a security issue with “big Brother” 8) .
Re Sadgeezer:
I would suggest a simple opening page for newcomers. The information on the current page is simply overwhelming to many; plus most (i.e. me for example) never scroll down the page so all that information is lost but the extra load time remains.
When we had the extra traffic earlier this summer – did anyone ever calculate the extra increase in membership? Was it a one time and never come back experience? I do not know; but fast navigation is not a drag to the fence sitters and repeat visiters should eventually become members.
New home page – that is a change to be thought out carefully, you should get a lot of input from the membership if you go this route (Oh…..36 seconds for P4/XP/IE6/dial-up in London for the regular home page).
Maurice
74 seconds main, but I am used to that where I live, 25 seconds light.
I think it would be a good idea to make light or a version of light the default for the initial hook. Then you can suck new addicts in by saying “Get access to the full featured pages when you register!” 😈
83;D
I have noticed the site get slower recently. But I thought it had more to do with allthe search engines checking our new html pages. For those who haven’t noticed, all of the php pages have been converted to html. This allows the search engines to serach the entire site.
If we had to nix certain sections of the main page I’d remove: calender (it’s so congested with reminders, its somewhat impotent), sadhoo recent links, site progress, news archives (by months), polls, who’s online, and possibly limit the number of new news articles displayed.
The main menu, and sg guides blocks MUST stay.
While the site does seem slower, its not that bad relative to other websites upon initial loading. My homepage comcast.net and previous msn.com both take similar amoutns of time to load as sadgeezer.com. I’ve noticed some websites ebay, google load quickly; but lets not forget that these are HIGHLY commercial websites, whit much better servers then ours.
Odd, I just lost my post, I won’t bother repeating it all. I agree with Pet and Fatguy. Not only will it load faster (if I click on a site when surfing the net and it doesn’t open, I often leave mid-stream) and it might well be a little less intimidating for new people if they start off with a simplified page…
Don’t want to lose any of the functionality of the boards (great that it’s so interactive), I’m sure those of us who are regulars at the site will wish to stick with the [i]SadHeavy[/i] theme… And it could be an incentive for people to register.
But some of it, as Headge said, could go IMHO. The “site progress” is more helpful to the admin for instance….
[i]Hey! Some Village person is putting words in my posts! [/i]
Not that I don’t agree with them, but much of my previous post was not put there by me. What is this technique called, Number 5? I am not familiar with it. 😆
83;)
[quote=”pet”][i]Hey! Some Village person is putting words in my posts! [/i]
Not that I don’t agree with them, but much of my previous post was not put there by me. What is this technique called, Number 5? I am not familiar with it. 😆
83;)[/quote]
A poor example of “instant postal conversion.” Sorry about that, it’s fixed, really not sure how that happened, well at least I know where it ended up (and not in The Village as I presumed). 😆
-No. 5
[quote=”Headgehog”]If we had to nix certain sections of the main page I’d remove: calender (it’s so congested with reminders, its somewhat impotent), sadhoo recent links, site progress, news archives (by months), polls, who’s online, and possibly limit the number of new news articles displayed.
The main menu, and sg guides blocks MUST stay. [/quote]
WE’re probably going to have to do that. I just saved the main page to a file and that file (html – without graphics) came to over 110Kb. That’s far too big for an opening page. I’ll have a think about the block which will have to go.
Personally I think Ill stay with the original “Centauri”ish skin. That Purple and silver is too familiar for me to change now =)
I think I must have the graphics all cached on my laptop, I never have any lag loading, only takes 5-6 seconds on dialup for me. If it’s 110kb then it must be cached for me since I connect at about 4k
I think the ideas here are great though. I like the “Who’s online”; but the calender and reminders, I don’t think I’ve ever used personally.
I would definitely argue for condensing the front page. Maybe just have news from the past week posted (sometimes news on the front page near the bottom is a few weeks to a month old).
In any event I think the front page is like 2-4 screens long? Which for first time visitors might be a problem if they dont see any links they want they may not bother scrolling down.
In a sense; Sadgeezer’s site has grown from a small to a mid-sized operation, but it is beginning to grow to a point that a rethink of some parts is necessary – or the site will implode. Think of the site growing but the fan base not growing with it – something has to give…..
The home page is key. Sadgeezer’s home page is the most complex home page I have ever visited. While a state of the art machine and state of the art connection may bring up the home page quickly – we must not forget that much of the world does not have this capability. For them…..Sadgeezer’s home page is a permanent barrier to the delights inside. I am reminded of myself surfing the net two years ago with a 386 and seeing messages telling me that the page was taking a long time to display and ultimately showing the “This page can not be displayed.” message…..frustrating! Much of the world is using “hand-me-down” machines and problematic internet connections. A vast base of potential members are being blocked out by the home page. Look at Asian home pages – simple for a reason – they know what many of their customers are using and they cater accordingly.
What is wrong with sci-fi convention reports from Vietnam? How about members discussing Dune from the Congo? What about poor Wai Chang surfing the net in some illegal cyber cafe in China? They will if they are allowed access to this site. If “The SadGeezers Guide to Cult TV Science Fiction” is the most comprehensive guide on the net…..then it is time to think “Global”…..
Making the home page user friendly is the biggest improvement with regard to access. We in first world countries, should not be smug and belittle the contributions to this site from poorer nations. As I see it – this site needs an influx of members to keep it vital. My two pence worth…..
Maurice
Fatguy, I honestly can’t agree with most of what you say. Some of the comments are out of date and others are completely wrong!
As I mentioned in a previous post, I took a decision last year NOT to develop this site to the lowest common denominator download speed. This site can be loaded via a modem with standard telephone internet connection, but it works better (like all sites) with a higher connection speed. If I hadn’t made this decision the site would be a collection of flat html pages which would be out of date and unmanageable. 42 seconds to download the main page is NOT the fault of this site or it’s server, it the fault of your Internet Service Provider! I tested the page download on a 56Kbit modem today and it was 22 seconds!
The complexity of the front page is also intentional (though not the physical size). Just because YOU don’t read all the page doesn’t mean that others wont.
This site is a growing collection of guides and resources for fans of cult sci fi shows, the resources are searchable with a basic knowledge management system. Users have access to many, many types of resources from book reviews, purity tests, forum posts, comments on articles, pictures and DVD reviews. To provide this facility the site must be separated into manageable modules and each of these modules must be populated with relevant content. There is always something to checkout on this site, it’s rare that people will have seen everything!
[b]The biggest problem with the site is the one that you missed completely! [/b] There isn’t enough content yet to fully exploit the features that have been developed. If people in China wanted to know what day Babylon 5 was on in their province they would visit this site more often,[i] even putting up with the slow loading pages. [/i]But they don’t because we haven’t yet found a way of transferring TV schedules. If someone in Iran wanted to read the review of the Terminal episode fa LEXX from season 2 and navigate the site using the Arabic language, they should be able to. And these features will make the site more popular in the future as it is developed.
Some people visit this site to read forum posts (and never contribute). Some visit the site to download spacebabe pictures, others to read reviews etc. They don’t come to use all the site and even it it was laid out to suit them they should still only visit the areas that interested them, this site is, after all a Cult TV Sci Fi Portal (still under development). For this reason you can access any of the thousands of pages on this site with a maximum of three clicks from the main page – it’s not complicated it’s simply content rich [i](or it will be!).[/i]
I had this argument a few years ago with the then Chief Executive of ICL (Peter Bonfel – now the MD of British Telecom). I’d just delivered two papers on the subject (The Impact of the Media on the Information Society‘, Media & the Information Society Conference (University of Timisoara, Romania. October 1997) and Developing the Information Society – A Sub-regional Perspective‘, The Information Society and the Regions in Europe, a British/German Comparison. (University of Tubingen, Germany 1997).) and put forward the case the the priority for the development of the Information society was the provision of Information and not infrastructure. If webmasters design site for low-bandwidth customers there will be no incentive for the development of better websites because such development will only cater for users of the poorest equipment.
This site is under development, it has been for 5 years and will be for a long time yet. The new systems that were developed for this site will be out of date in a year or two but for those of you who remember sadgeezer.com [url=http://web.archive.org/web/19981205184108/http://www.sadgeezer.com/index.htm]Version 1[/url] (1998) or [url=http://web.archive.org/web/20000610211139/http://www.sadgeezer.com/index.htm]Version 2[/url] (2001) or [url=http://web.archive.org/web/20020127022805/http://www.sadgeezer.com/index.htm]Version 3[/url] (2002), will know that I strongly believe content is king.
The main page will change, but not too much. I’ll take a few of the blocks out but most certainly NOT any content. Just because you don’t check the whole page doesn’t mean that others don’t. Besides, one of the best things about this site is that there is always something new to discover!
The change in theme was an attempt to help those will low bandwidth access. There is very little else that I can do without changing the site to the detriment of others.
No problem Sadgeezer….. Just tossing suggestions, and yes…..programming and such is not my strong point (my last attempt was in 1978 – COBOL – that ended in me shoving a tray of cards (remember those?????) down a sewer…..). I just thought I would voice the sentiments of many that were too “chicken” to tell it to the “man”. Actually…..there are many here who are afraid of you 😯 – victims of the innate deference to the organizational structure. I don’t have that problem; but I really do appreciate you creating this site and making it what it is today – I use it a lot…..so you can take that as a genuine compliment from a guy who does not give compliments freely.
That being said, whatever changes you make will make this site more enjoyable – that I am sure. You may be correct about the site/server not responsible for many of the problems loading up the page; however, a complex home page would probably exacerbate the problems of the crappy connections some people have. Take that friend of mine in the UK, I timed the second load at one minute and a half and stopped – thinking this is an ISP problem. However, the service provider was the second one this person has tried in the London area (dial-up)…..they all seem bad….. That is just one example – and the whining about going to Sadgeezer…..well it just made me think that maybe a lot of people were in this situation….. Consider me just a lowly grunt reporting the situation in the trenches; I do not know what can or cannot be done and the priorities involved. Just consider my comments for what they are. You are the captain of this ship; and transients like “Fatguy’ will come and go and never take responsibility or have to live with the decisions you must continually make. Personally – listening to the trials and tribulations some site owners go through to keep their venues operating – I would go crazy after just a few months; therefore, I will impressed with whatever positive changes you make to make Sadgeezer a better place for it’s members to use.
Maurice
[quote=”Fatguy”] I just thought I would voice the sentiments of many that were too “chicken” to tell it to the “man”. Actually…..there are many here who are afraid of you 😯 ……..
Maurice[/quote]Don’t be silly. I have never had anyone on this board express that sentiment to me about Sad. And I have e’d and chated with tons of ‘geezers.
on cable, but still noticed the pages loaded a tad faster.
As a bonus, everything becomes more spread out (well optical illusionwise) and slightly easier to read
Just a comment- is there a way for registered users to have an options page (or the eqivalent) with the boxes on the sides- eg competition, main menu, calendar etc listed with a checkbox next to them.
Only those checked (plus any new ones that may be added as the site progresses) will load up. The rest won’t. I know u can click the little + next to each but it may be an idea to get rid of those u don’t need- eg calendar etc. It’s already been said different people want different things, but to gove each person more of a choice as to what loads up, you may get the best of both worlds- everyone choses what they want and don’t want to load up).
Anyway keep up the good work.
[quote=”fluffy bunny”]Just a comment- is there a way for registered users to have an options page (or the eqivalent) with the boxes on the sides- eg competition, main menu, calendar etc listed with a checkbox next to them.
Only those checked (plus any new ones that may be added as the site progresses) will load up. The rest won’t. I know u can click the little + next to each but it may be an idea to get rid of those u don’t need- eg calendar etc. It’s already been said different people want different things, but to gove each person more of a choice as to what loads up, you may get the best of both worlds- everyone choses what they want and don’t want to load up).
Anyway keep up the good work.[/quote]
It’s a great idea but I don’t know how to do it!
I’ll see if there could be a way in the future. In the meantime however, it may be possible to design themes that are minimalist. FOr instance, we could have a block with links to the calendar, polls, news archive, book/dvd choices etc. rather than have them as compulsory blocks.
This may help to get around Fatguys points about consideraton for low bandwidth users but also for others who are only interested in certain areas of the site. We could, for instance, have a LEXX theme, it would only (initially) show LEXX news or LEXX forum posts (with [b][i]links [/i][/b]to the others in case the user was interested in checking the other areas of the site).
I’ll have a think about it – cheers for the suggestion
[quote=”SadGeezer”]We could, for instance, have a LEXX theme, it would only (initially) show LEXX news or LEXX forum posts (with [b][i]links [/i][/b]to the others in case the user was interested in checking the other areas of the site).[/quote]
This is just an initial thought on your thought regarding Fluffy Bunny’s suggestion (excuse me if I’m [b]a lot[/b] over-dramatic ;))…
A true cult sci-fi enthusiast is interested in learning more about (and experiencing) ALL cult sci-fi…. Doesn’t necessarily mean you’ll like it, but as a cult sci-fi enthusiast you’d be remiss in totally neglecting it.
My fear is that that would compartmentalise the members here even more – create the conditions for a sort of sectional user segregation. We aren’t just Lexxists; we aren’t just Whovians; we aren’t just The Village People; we aren’t just Angelic posters in the Buff; we aren’t just Babylers, we aren’t just Dunesters etc.*; we’re cult sci-fi enthusiasts (not just one or two cult shows, cult sci-fi generally). We’re members of a sadgeezer community that has many shows in the fold, and comprises a diverse group of people who share one major thing in common; a love of sci-fi.
For me this site is about being introduced to the new, and developing enthusiasm for ALL of cult sci-fi. If, for ease of use, people decided just to set it up so they only have the option to access what they’re currently interested in, well they might really miss out on great opportunities to broaden their cult sci-fi horizons, and it may lead to increased [i]cliquiness[/i]. I fear this may create a serious divide amongst this cult sci-fi community. I may not participate in some of the fora much (or is the word forums preferable to fora?), ‘though I try to contribute to most, but as long as it’s in view, as long as I can see the shows’ fora and am therefore conscious of it — I may grow to appreciate them; at least I read others thoughts on the shows. Even if one has never seen a particular show, one can still participate in the [i]forums[/i] with access to a little info.
I suppose that at least the forum members would still come together in The Pub.
Sadgeezer’s and cult enthusiasts of the world unite!
On second thought, it may be a great idea. I just hope that if you were to implement it that people won’t forget that there other fora/sections out there worthy of visitation, and a world of cult sci-fi worth seeking out and exploring (just because you’re not familiar with it yet…).
[i]*sorry, I still don’t know the labels that the fan communities of certain shows go by (what’s a Buffy fan called for instance?)[/i]
[quote=”TheFrey”][quote=”Phi”]I just thought I would voice the sentiments of many that were too “chicken” to tell it to the “man”. Actually…..there are many here who are afraid of you ……..[/quote]
Don’t be silly. I have never had anyone on this board express that sentiment to me about Sad. And I have e’d and chated with tons of ‘geezers.[/quote]
No indeed, look at my post here for example. Would someone who was at all intimidated post such an over-dramatic piece of fluff as my post here, for example, in response to “the man”? Most posters biggest fear from what I’ve been told at other sites concerning other sites is being ignored and not appreciated by the members there. Fear of being ridiculed is about number three on the list. This is a harmonious community, one of the few where debate, discussion, and alternative viewpoints are actually encouraged by established figures(within reason of course). on to earlier points: This is a great site, a site that is constantly evolving, has friendly and fascinating members, and a place where there’s always something new to discover!
I quite agree with Logan there. I think If there was a Lexx compartment, I’d probably drop into it and after a while start wondering why the site has shrunk so much.
[quote=”fatguy”]Actually…..there are many here who are afraid of you [/quote]
Err, just who exactly are these [b]many?[/b] I’m certainly not one of them.(It’s that bunch down in Grey 17 again isn’t it 😆 )
cult sci-fi in general? Hmmn I think most people would get a good dose of that if they went channel surfing to be honest- more so than a load of text links on a site.
Surely shows such as star trek, doctor who, monkey, twin peaks, sapphire and steel, the quartermass series, dark angel, and stargate sg1 (shuddder) should also be somewhere
But I see your point about the disadvantages of compartmentalising everything. Then again people won’t click on links they don’t really want to read from the front page (for example if I’m truly honest, I don’t think I’ve been in the Lexx section since I’ve been here, purely because the episodes of the show I’ve seen haven’t really appealed to me- if i remember right, found the B5 section on a search engine a few yrs ago. Then remembered the name whilst typing things into the address bar last yr). I don’t see the problem when Lexx news comes up though.
Anyway, the geezer was only talking about a few themes- maybee with extra links/graphics built in to give the user some choice as to what the site looks like. It’s still all there, just in a different order (maybee by giving priority 1 to all stories for that theme- eg red dwarf= all red dwarf stories to the top, whilst everything else is priority 2 in order)
[quote=”thefrey”][quote=”Fatguy”] I just thought I would voice the sentiments of many that were too “chicken” to tell it to the “man”. Actually…..there are many here who are afraid of you 😯 ……..
Maurice[/quote]Don’t be silly. I have never had anyone on this board express that sentiment to me about Sad. And I have e’d and chated with tons of ‘geezers.[/quote]
I agree and that line was not constructed very well. I thought about saying that many were intimidated by Sadgeezer’s position – but that made him look as if he was “brow-beating” people 🙄 . Perhaps I should have said than many people have complained to me about the long load times but did not have the “motivation” to say anything to Sadgeezer/Administrators…..and would continue to complain to me about the long load times….. So – I got the hint and did the “Fatguy” thing. I am a machine and you have worked me…..
Maurice
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.