Shared publicly  - 
 
I've been a page speed fanatic for many years now (it has just got to score over 90 in PageSpeed Insights :) ), and I get excited when I see new tools come out to help.

Yesterday Googlers +Joshua Marantz and +Ilya Grigorik announced that mod_pagespeed Apache module is out of beta, about 2 years after it was first announced. Awesome, right?

And today I learn from Hacker News about the nascent PageSpeed for nginx project: https://github.com/pagespeed/ngx_pagespeed Double awesome!

If you're not convinced yet you need to invest in your site's performance see this - there are many stories like it:
https://plus.google.com/114552443805676710515/posts/Pd9jrs9upiQ

To see how your website is doing, check out PageSpeed Insights:

https://developers.google.com/speed/pagespeed/insights

It's good for your users and good for you.
18
6
gianmaria mazzeo's profile photoAndy Wigglesworth's profile photoPierre Far's profile photoThomas Hey'l's profile photo
14 comments
 
94/100 on one of mine, rest score between 87-89! I'd love to learn how to implement these extra steps, but I am assuming you will need  something more than a shared hosting account :)

One day I'll take the next step on better hosting.
 
94, 95 and 98, nice :)
 
The highest I've ever reached was 98. All that was left was low priority stuff.

+Andy Wigglesworth: A good way to think about page speed is to break down into steps: the browser requests the page, the server gets the connection and the request, which leads the server to have a think about what to send, which is then sent, and that gets rendered in the browser.

Depending on what your site needs in terms of computing power, hosting may not be the biggest bottleneck for you. The rendering part is a huge part of page slowness, and so focusing on that can get you serious wins quickly. 
 
My highest priority is Leverage browser caching , I've read on how to do it, If i read it loads of more times i might know How to actually do it for real :)
 
Ye I got that one George, thought I had it covered already, just checked and my Header set Expires is out of date ;(
 
Pierre, I have done some checks using the PageSpeed Insights web tool. I score 91 for internal pages, but the homepage is lower, at 81 - I think because of all the images. Should I try to improve this, or just be happy that most of the site is reasonably quick?
 
Just updated it and still get the same message, Argh, Google's fault Lol

The following cacheable resources have a short freshness lifetime. Specify an expiry of at least one week in the future for the following resources:
https://apis.google.com/js/plusone.js (30 minutes)
 
Up to 92/100 thanks to +Pe lagic :)

Maybe even sneak another point or two yet !!
 
Unless I include Google content like AdSense (wink, wink) my score is pretty good.  I.e. for my private homepage, it's 99/100 - and the rest is because of copyright notices that need to reside in JavaScript (it's a matter of respect and 258 bytes) and a CSS rule required for guess who? Chrome only.

One important notice about that (or maybe two ;-) ):  The PageSpeed tools obviously cannot measure User agent failures like the known IE9 JavaScript issues (not only the known ones from the 64bit versions w/o JIT compiler) and they cannot measure DNS or server flaws. 

The real thing is that it's perfect to do what you can to remove all detectable flaws and follow all rules.  But what counts then, is the time until the content above the fold will be fully visible for the user.

It's not so important whether the rest of the content will take two or three seconds more to load, but the first impression is what really matters in terms of user satisfaction.  If users like what they first see, they will certainly bear two seconds more, but not six or ten.
Add a comment...