Internet Explorer

More new findings: Top ecommerce sites are 22% slower than they were last year

Let me say that again, because this is a staggering fact: The world’s top ecommerce sites are 22% slower than they were last year.

In December 2011, the median load time for a site in the Alexa Retail 2000 was 5.94 seconds. Just twelve months later, the median was 7.25 seconds. At this rate of growth, this number could hit almost 9 seconds by the end of this year.

Web page load time changes: December 2011 to December 2012

This was the key finding of our brand-new quarterly report (yes, a new report, not to be confused with last week’s report about web performance in the EU) on ecommerce web performance. If you’re new to these reports, since 2010 we’ve been measuring the load time, page composition, and best practice implementation of the same set of 2,000 leading online retailers, as ranked by Alexa. The goal is to learn how pages are changing over time and what impact, if any, these changes have on per-page performance. The results have been eye-opening.

I have to confess that I frequently feel like that tiresome guy at the party who keeps saying the same things over and over again. Pages are getting slower… pages are getting bigger… the gap between load times and user expectations is getting wider almost by the week. If you’re reading this out there and saying to yourself, “I can’t believe that Bixby guy is going on about this AGAIN,” then forward the next part of this post to five people you think could really benefit from it. If enough people internalize this message, maybe I’ll shut up.*

Three performance myths I would give anything to permanently bust:

Myth #1. Pages are, de facto, getting faster.

What with our better systems, networks, and browsers, pages must be getting faster, right? Everyone believes this instinctively, because most of us seem to be hardwired to believe that technology solves problems rather than creating new ones. But as I said at the top of this post, the quickly emerging fact is that pages seem to not just be getting slower, they’re getting slower at an alarming rate. (Optional: You may choose to take this finding as proof that we shouldn’t always trust our instincts. :) )

Myth #2. Users are more or less satisfied with the status quo.

“People are used to pages that take 5-8 seconds to load. They don’t mind that much.” I still hear this on a regular basis. Site owners rationalize that, because they’re not hearing a lot of complaints, their visitors are happy… or at least happy enough. But as numerous case studies have shown, people talk with their wallets. Faster sites earn more. And user surveys over the years are telling us that people’s expectations for a speedy online experience are continually growing:

Web Page Load Time: User expectations 200-2012

Myth #3. Browser development is more than capable of mitigating the factors, such as page size and complexity, that are causing pages to slow down.

This belief is widely held, even among technical folks. Again, looking to our findings, we saw that for all three browsers, median load times slowed down by anywhere from 3% to 12% in just six months. This downward trend isn’t a browser development issue. Instead, it’s an indicator that despite browser vendors’ huge commitment to speed, development can’t keep pace with the demands of bigger and increasingly complex web pages.
Browser performance: 2011 to 2012

Takeaway: Pass it on.

I am extremely happy that Radware is committed to continuing the tradition of releasing these quarterly  “state of the union” reports. As time passes, we’re gaining some invaluable insights. Based on these latest results, I’m very curious to see what our Summer 2013 report will hold.

I urge you to download this report (and the infographics, too). And I was only slightly kidding when I suggested that you forward this post to people who need to have a few performance myths dispelled. Our community does a lot of preaching to the choir. What seems basic to us is not necessarily basic to the rest of the world. We need to get out there and make sure these simple messages are being heard.

*Maybe.

Related posts:

2013 predictions: The average web page will hit 2MB, Android will pull ahead of iOS for good, and your smartphone will get infected with a virus

It wouldn’t be December without a batch of audacious predictions for the new year. Assuming we all survive past December 21st, here’s what I think 2013 will hold for site owners, mobile users, CIOs/CTOs, RUM vendors, and the browser wars.

1. The average web page is going to hit 2MB.

A year ago, I predicted that the average web page would hit 1MB in 2012, which it did in May. Today, the average page is 1280KB. In a post I wrote last month, I predicted that, at the current rate of growth, typical page size would hit 2MB in early 2014. I’m upgrading that prediction to the end of 2013. Call it a hunch. This has massive implications for site owners in terms of bandwidth, but mobile users will be hardest hit, from both a usability perspective and a throttling/data cap perspective.

2. By the end of 2013, at least half of all North Americans will own a tablet.

Currently, 29% of North Americans own some kind of tablet. With the proliferation of new inexpensive tablets, with the emergence of kids as a mostly untapped tablet market, and with Christmas just around the corner, I’m predicting that more than 50% of North Americans will own a tablet by year end.

3. Global mobile traffic will hit 25% of total internet traffic.

Right now this number is 13%, but numbers are surging in China and India.

4. 25% of online shopping will be via mobile.

With the explosive adoption of tablets, we’re going to see a major jump in mobile shopping. Mobile phones and tablets represented 24% of online shopping on Black Friday, up from 6% just two years ago. We’re going to see that Black Friday stat become the norm.

5. 2013 will be the year your smartphone gets infected with a virus.

You know it’s coming. Cue the dark lords of anti-virus software to the rescue.

6. Android will pull ahead of iOS smartphone adoption. For good.

In five years, we’re all going to look back on 2013 as the year Android pulled ahead for good on smart phones. When it comes to this kind of call, I use the Strangeloop team as the canary in the coal mine. My dev team is moving to Android en masse. I haven’t seen this type of shift since 2009 when the mass exodus from Blackberry began.

7. Mobile performance will continue to be a major problem.

Mobile sites will remain too slow. Too many people still believe that their simplified mobile site is the answer (which it’s not, because it’s often too simple), or that responsive web design is the answer (which it’s not, because RWD pages can actually be even bigger and slower than a typical page). There’s no single magic bullet for mobile performance. Companies are going to have to really apply themselves to finding solutions that work for their unique situations.

8. This will be a great year for Chrome, an okay year for Internet Explorer, and a bad year for Firefox.

Internet Explorer will halt the bleeding and stabilize, but not grow, its market share. Chrome will hit 45% of worldwide browser market share by the end of the year — almost entirely at the expense of Firefox.

9. Two of the four largest CDNs will be acquired and integrated into larger companies.

I’m not naming names, and I have no inside information. This is just my hunch that we’re going to see big changes in this market.

10. Netflix will continue its decline, while Amazon video delivery will ascend.

Amazon’s rise in video delivery to the home will become evident in 2013. Amazon can outspend almost anyone for content — and when it comes to video, content trumps all.

11. DDOS attack mitigation will dominate the enterprise.

There’s nothing CIOs/CTOs hate more than visible failure. Sixty-five percent of the top ecommerce sites will have a mitigation strategy in place by the end of 2013.

12. RUM vendors will finally start to make money.

Real user monitoring will move from the sideshow to the main stage for half of analytics vendors. We’ll even see the first example of actionable RUM, which operations can use to trigger alarms that matter. Operations will start to trust RUM. By year end, RUM will be found on 35% of ecommerce sites.

Related posts:

Browser innovation and the 14 rules for faster loading websites: Revisiting Steve’s work (part 3)

This is the final post in a series in which I’ve been addressing a question that was put to me by a customer a few months ago:

“Aren’t many of the web performance rules described by Steve Souders in 2007 already outdated or made obsolete by browser innovation?”

You can check out parts 1 and 2, though it’s not necessary to read those first in order to understand today’s post. Today, I’m looking at the last four rules:

  • Avoid redirects
  • Remove duplicate scripts
  • Configure ETags
  • Make AJAX cacheable

Methodology

1. As with my previous post, I used the test cases of the performance rules that Steve created five years ago, which are still available. In my earlier posts, I  timestamped them to October 2007 using the Wayback Machine.

2. Next, I ran each test case on Internet Explorer 6 on WebPagetest to get a sense of what Steve would have seen for performance rules 11 through 14. I did three runs of each test and used the median result.

3. Then I ran each test case on Chrome 23 to see what impact, if any, the rules have on a modern browser. Again, I performed three runs of each test and recorded the median result.

4. Using the above approach, I was able to see and compare the before-and-after results for each rule for both browsers, and then calculate the benefit.

Reminder: As I stated in my earlier posts, the goal here is not to look at how fast Chrome 19 is versus Internet Explorer 6. We have looked at this in the past. This time I want to look at the relative benefit of each performance rule.

Findings

As it turned out, there were no test cases for three out of four of these rules, for reasons I’ll explain below. Here’s a high-level look at the results:

Rule 11: Avoid redirects

What this rule means: In broad terms, a redirect is a permanent or temporary redirect from one URL to the other. A permanent redirect is response code 301. There are multiple temporary ones, but the response code most commonly used to describe a temporary redirect is 302. There are several reasons why sites use redirects, such as fixing missing trailing slashes, connecting websites, and internal/outbound tracking, to name just a few.

Fixing missing trailing slashes

This is a really common dev mistake. As Steve says, “One of the most wasteful redirects happens frequently and web developers are generally not aware of it. It occurs when a trailing slash (/) is missing from a URL that should otherwise have one.”

Connecting websites

For example, if the URL for your old website was www.goodsite.com and you wanted to change it to www.bettersite.com, you’d implement a 301 redirect from the old URL to the new one. Now whoever typed in your old URL (or clicked on a leftover link to your old URL) would automatically get taken to your new URL.

Internal/outbound tracking

Redirects are a way to figure out where visitors are going next. When you’re about to leave a site (say, from a search result page), instead of just hyperlinking to the new site, the link takes you to a URL on the current site that then redirects you to the new site. That in-between URL tracks the fact that you’re leaving the site and where you’re going.

Browsers can’t fix redirect problems. This fix lies with site owners.

As Steve points out, “The main thing to remember is that redirects slow down the user experience. Inserting a redirect between the user and the HTML document delays everything in the page since nothing in the page can be rendered and no components can start being downloaded until the HTML document has arrived.”

As the rule states, avoid redirects. For example, don’t use redirects to keep track of clicks that leave your site. Instead, Steve offers two alternative techniques that send a non-blocking beacon as a visitor clicks away from the page, so the visitor doesn’t have to wait for the redirect before going to a new site.

Testing the rule: N/A

Rule 12: Remove duplicate scripts

What this rule means: It’s no surprise that duplicate scripts — which generate unnecessary HTTP requests and waste time evaluating the same script more than once — hurt performance. What is surprising is that this mistake happens so often. This issue is more likely to pop up when development teams are large and when pages contain a huge number of scripts.

As Steve said back in 2007, “Unnecessary HTTP requests happen in Internet Explorer, but not in Firefox. In Internet Explorer, if an external script is included twice and is not cacheable, it generates two HTTP requests during page loading. Even if the script is cacheable, extra HTTP requests occur when the user reloads the page.”

Testing the rule: Steve experimented with implementing caching on a page to test its ability to deal with duplicate scripts. As you can see in the table below, this had a significant impact on IE6. The impact on Chrome was negligible, probably because Chrome does better parallelism and is more aggressive with caching duplicate scripts, even with resources that were not coded to be cached.

I also tested different versions of Internet Explorer, in order to pinpoint the version that evolved to address the duplicate scripts problem. As you can see in the table below, this happened with IE8.

Test case
Benefit in IE6 Benefit in IE7 Benefit in IE8 Benefit in
Chrome 23
Duplicate script – cached 20% 16% 1% 1%
Duplicate script – 10 cached 19% 15% 1% 1%

Rule 13: Configure ETags

What this rule means: There’s no test case for this rule — because this is a server issue, not a front-end issue — but I still want to review it here in order to talk about why this rule is important.

An ETag (also known as entity tag) is a string that uniquely identifies a specific version of a page object. Web servers and browsers use the ETag to determine whether an object in the browser’s cache matches the object on the origin server. When implemented correctly, ETags can help performance for repeat visits because they provide a kind of shortcut that allows the browser to validate objects more quickly.

Sounds good, right? But there’s a catch. As Steve points out, “The problem with ETags is that they typically are constructed using attributes that make them unique to a specific server hosting a site. ETags won’t match when a browser gets the original component from one server and later tries to validate that component on a different server—a situation that is all too common on web sites that use a cluster of servers to handle requests. By default, both Apache and IIS embed data in the ETag that dramatically reduces the odds of the validity test succeeding on web sites with multiple servers.”

As Steve counsels, “If you’re not taking advantage of the flexible validation model that ETags provide, it’s better to just remove the ETag altogether. The Last-Modified header validates based on the component’s timestamp. And removing the ETag reduces the size of the HTTP headers in both the response and subsequent requests.”

To clarify: ETags are not bad things in and of themselves. They’re actually a more accurate way of performing invalidation. But, because of their preciseness, if you want to harness the power of ETags, you need to make sure the same ETag is deterministically generated across your servers for a specific resource. If you’re not going to do that, it’s best not to use them, since misconfigured ETags will hurt you.

Testing the rule: N/A

Rule 14: Make AJAX cacheable

What this rule means: No test case for this rule, this time because Steve counsels that you apply the same performance rules already discussed to your Ajax requests — particularly having a far future Expires header.

Testing the rule: N/A

Let’s recap.

Here’s a summary of everything I learned over the course of revisiting all 14 of Steve’s rules:

Most of the performance rules have stood the test of time.

As I stated in the earlier posts, it’s striking how similar the results are for many of the test cases. I had expected that the rules would still be relevant, but I had also expected that browser evolution would have resulted in a greater gap between the results for IE6 and Chrome. If you build web applications and you care about performance, Steve’s book should still be your bible.

Reducing roundtrips still matters.

It doesn’t matter how much better modern browsers are at rendering page objects; fewer calls to the server still make a huge difference. Seeing that adding an Expires header leads to a 59% improvement in Chrome 19 tells me this technique is still incredibly relevant.

A CDN helps in some situations, but not all.

A CDN is a must for many sites, but it’s not a standalone performance solution. Benefits will vary depending on which CDN you choose, as well as things like how your CDN stores content and how far their PoPs are from users.

Compression still helps. A lot.

Not only did Gzipping offer benefits in Chrome, it offered even greater benefits than in IE6. This is a really compelling finding. It shows that, despite the advances made in modern browsers, modern pages have also changed a lot — meaning that more than ever they can benefit from compression.

The location of stylesheets is important, but it depends on the page composition.

Start render really matters and the location of the stylesheets is critical.

“Avoid CSS expressions” is obsolete… for all the right reasons.

It was interesting to see how a rule — avoid CSS expressions — has become so entrenched over time that it’s no longer an issue.

Unless you’re developing for older versions of IE, you probably don’t need to worry about avoiding duplicate scripts.

Newer browsers take care of the duplicate script problem — possibly due to the mitigating impact of doing better parallelism and/or more aggressive caching. But be sure to know whether or not a significant portion of your traffic uses IE6 and 7. If they do, then you still need to apply this rule. If you don’t apply it, you could be missing out on an opportunity to make a 15-20% performance gain.

Conclusion

I had a great time with this set of posts and want to thank Steve, not just for pioneering the original set of rules, but for his support and advice as I worked my way through all my tests. Thanks, Steve!

Related posts:

New findings: Ecommerce sites are 9% slower than in 2011

Two years ago, when Strangeloop started tracking the load times of 2,000 top North American ecommerce sites, we had a hunch we’d spot some interesting trends over time. We did not expect, however, to see that pages are continuing to get slower rather than faster. Yet according to the Fall 2012 release of our quarterly Ecommerce Page Speed and Web Performance State of the Union, which came out today, that’s exactly what’s happening.

Not only are pages slower, they’re dramatically slower. Since November 2011, when we last tested these sites, the median home page has taken a 9% performance hit, with load time increasing from 5.94 seconds to 6.5 seconds. This flies in the face of conventional belief that, thanks to faster browsers, networks, and devices, the average end user is enjoying a premium online experience. This is clearly not the case. As user expectations continue to grow, the gap between expectations and reality continues to widen.

Ecommerce Page Speed and Web Performance State of the Union [Fall 2012]

These graphics (higher res version here) illustrate a few of our  findings. I encourage you to download the report to read the rest. Without giving it all away, here are a few highlights:

  • Internet Explorer 10 served pages faster than other browsers, most notably 8% faster than Chrome 20. We tested each page across a number of browsers, including the latest versions of IE, Chrome, and Firefox. It’s important to bear in mind that these were simple tests that didn’t take into account the many nuances of browser performance (which is discussed further in the report), but we considered these results interesting enough to share.
  • Top sites are 10% slower than the pack as a whole. While the median site took 6.5 seconds to load, we saw even poorer results when we looked at the top 100 sites (ranked by revenue and profitability), with the median Alexa 100 home page having a load time of 7.14 seconds. Check out the report for our thoughts on this.
  • Many sites are still not following core performance best practices. We found that 30% of sites tested did not use compression, and 12% did not use keep-alives. As I’ve talked about elsewhere, these two fairly simple techniques can yield big results, including up to 52% improvement in start render time.

Why you should care about these findings

To my knowledge, Strangeloop’s state of the union reports (which we’re now releasing on a quarterly basis) are the only ongoing surveys that measure performance from the perspective of real users. By using WebPagetest, we can simulate performance across browsers and realistic latencies, and get a real-world look at how websites actually behave. It’s easy for site owners to fall into the trap of thinking that their sites are fast for everyone, because site owners are typically seeing benchmark tests run out of datacenters.

I want to emphasize that reports like this one are not a substitute for the real user monitoring you should be performing on your site on an ongoing basis. Instead, consider it a snapshot that we can collectively hold up as a mirror of big-picture ecommerce performance.

As always, I welcome your feedback and questions.

Download the report: State of the Union: Ecommerce Page Speed and Website Performance [Fall 2012]

Download a high-res version of the infographics above (and feel free to re-post): Poster: Ecommerce Page Speed and Website Performance [Fall 2012]

Related posts:

Browser innovation and the 14 rules for faster loading websites: Revisiting Steve’s work (part 2)

A few months back, I posted part 1 of a 3-part post to answer the question:

“Aren’t many of the web performance rules described by Steve Souders in 2007 already outdated or made obsolete by browser innovation?”

Despite the fact that my company was founded on the premise that Steve’s rules are our bible, I still place a great deal of value on testing core assumptions. Fortunately, testing the first five rules revealed that these performance rules have stood the test of time and are as valid today as they ever were.

Today (finally), I want to look at the next five rules:

Methodology

1. As with my previous post, I used these test cases of the performance rules that Steve created five years ago, and which are still available. Using the Wayback Machine, I timestamped them to October 2007.

Steve Souders: 14 rules for high performing web sites2. Next, I ran each test case on Internet Explorer 6 on WebPagetest to get a sense of what Steve would have seen for performance rules 6 through 10. I did three runs of each test and used the median result.

3. Then I ran each test case on Chrome 19 to see what impact, if any, the rules have on a modern browser. Again, I performed three runs of each test and recorded the median result.

4. Using the above approach, I was able to see and compare the before-and-after results for each rule for both browsers, and then calculate the benefit. You can see the detailed test results, along with links to the tests, in this spreadsheet.

Important: The goal here is not to look at how fast Chrome 19 is versus Internet Explorer 6. We have looked at this in the past. This time I want to look at the relative benefit of each performance rule.

Findings

Here’s a high-level look at the results:

Rule 6: Move scripts to the bottom of the page

What this rule means: It’s better to move scripts from the top to as low in the page as possible. One reason is to enable progressive rendering, but another is to achieve greater download parallelization.

With scripts, progressive rendering is blocked for all content below the script. Moving scripts as low in the page as possible means there’s more content above the script that is rendered sooner. The second problem caused by scripts is blocking parallel downloads. While a script is downloading, the browser won’t start any other downloads, even on different hostnames. [From High Performance Web Sites]

Testing the rule: Steve experimented with placing scripts in various places on a page in order to see their performance impact. Using the methodology above, I was able to see the performance benefit (defined by the improvement in document complete time) of applying two of these techniques to IE6 and Chrome 19:

Rule
Benefit in IE6 Benefit in Chrome 19
Scripts at the bottom 0.13% 18%
Deferred scripts
31% 18%

Rule 7: Avoid CSS expressions

What this rule means: CSS expressions are an older technique, supported in Internet Explorer up until the release of IE8, which let you set CSS properties dynamically. The problem with CSS expressions was that they were evaluated more often than most people realized. As Steve pointed out in 2007, moving the mouse around the page can easily generate more than 10,000 evaluations.

This technique has fallen out of practice, largely because of findings like Steve’s. Nobody with any common sense is using this technique anymore, so it’s not relevant.

There may, however, be a modern version of this same issue. I’ve heard reports abut similar issues with JavaScript performance due to easy-to-use JS libraries such as JQuery. Similar to CSS expressions, it’s very easy to hook up functions to JavaScript events like moving the mouse and scrolling, causing similar tens of thousands of calculations to happen. I’m not sure how often this is actually happening out in the real world, but it’s something to be aware of.

Testing the rule: N/A

Rule 8: Make JavaScript and CSS external

What this rule means: If users on your site have multiple page views per session and many of your pages re-use the same scripts and stylesheets, you could potentially benefit from cached external files.

Pages that have few (perhaps only one) page view per session may find that inlining JavaScript and CSS results in faster end-user response times.

For front pages that are typically the first of many page views, there are techniques that leverage the reduction of HTTP requests that inlining provides, as well as the caching benefits achieved through using external files. One such technique is to inline JavaScript and CSS in the front page, but dynamically download the external files after the page has finished loading. Subsequent pages would reference the external files that should already be in the browser’s cache. [From High Performance Web Sites]

Testing the rule: Below are the performance gains (defined as the improvement in document complete time in the repeat view) for both browsers:

Rule
Benefit in IE6 Benefit in Chrome 19
Cacheable external JS and CSS 37% 40%
Post-onload download 42% 45%
Dynamic inlining 38% 44%

Rule 9: Reduce DNS lookups

What this rule means: There’s no test case for this rule — because it’s a given that fewer DNS connections is a good thing — but I still want to review it here in order to talk about why it’s a good thing.

DNS lookup is when the browser looks up the domain of the object being requested by the browser. Think of this as asking the “phone book” of the internet to find someone’s phone number using their first and last name. DNS lookups are cached for better performance — on caching servers maintained by your ISP or LAN, on your operating system’s DNS cache, and in your browser cache.

Steve offers this advice: Reducing the number of unique hostnames has the potential to reduce the amount of parallel downloading that takes place in the page. Avoiding DNS lookups cuts response times, but reducing parallel downloads may increase response times. My guideline is to split these components across at least two but no more than four hostnames. This results in a good compromise between reducing DNS lookups and allowing a high degree of parallel downloads.

It’s important to know that some newer browsers (at least Chrome does) do DNS prefetching as well.

Testing the rule: N/A

Rule 10: Minify JavaScript

What this rule means: Minification is the practice of removing unnecessary characters — such as comments and white space — from code. This improves JavaScript response time because the size of the downloaded file is reduced. Minification is fairly straightforward, unlike its sister practice: obfuscation.

Like minification, obfuscation removes comments and white space, but it also munges the code — converting function and variable names into smaller strings, thereby making the code more compact as well as harder to read. While munging wasn’t originally conceived of as a performance practice, it was found that it can help performance because it reduces the code size beyond what is achieved by minification. (Warning: Obfuscation can lead to bugs, unlike minification, which is relatively problem free.)

In addition to minifying external scripts, you can also minify inlined script blocks. Even if you’re already gzipping your scripts, minifying them will still reduce the size by at least 5%.

Testing the rule: Below are the performance gains for both minification and obfuscation of different-sized files:

Rule
Benefit in IE6 Benefit in Chrome 19
Small script minified 14% 16%
Small script obfuscated 14% 15%
Large script minified 22% 21%
Large script obfuscated 23% 21%

Conclusion

Once again, it’s reassuring to see how many of the performance rules have stood the test of time. I was really struck by how similar the results were for many of the test cases. I had expected that the rules would still be relevant, but to be perfectly honest, I had also expected that browser evolution would have resulted in more disparity between the results.

It was also interesting to see how a rule — avoid CSS expressions — has become so entrenched over time that it’s no longer an issue.

This has been a really interesting exercise so far. I’m looking forward to part 3.

Related posts: