XenForo Bandwidth usage?

[dartho]

Just how "big" is XenForo?

I tried to check by saving a page locally via Firefox - it was over 400K, and a 2nd page I visited and saved was over 600K all up. That's 1mb for 2 views. That would cost me $2.04 if I visited from my mobile and was paying casual data rates! I know there is caching and stuff for js and css, assuming that IE under Windows Mobile 6.5 fully supports such, but it still seems big - those figures would probably stand for the first visit to a xenforo site.

I'd like to know how to more accurately measure this if anyone has some ideas.

This should also all be kept in mind when developing a mobile style - it's not just appearance, but bandwidth requirements also that needs to be taken into account.

 

[Jesepi]

You probably shouldn't be browsing forums on a phone without an actual data plan.

 

[Paul B]

I suspect it's still lower than most forums though due to the lack of icons, images, postbit data and all the other bloat one normally gets.

 

[Kier]

I think you'll find that XenForo is extremely light compared to most forum software.

To dismiss caching is to ignore a fundamental operating principle of the web. The HTML for this page comes in at around 10KB, which is very, very lightweight.

Regardless, the mobile style will be significantly lighter still.

 

[Forsaken]

I think you'll find that XenForo is extremely light compared to most forum software.

To dismiss caching is to ignore a fundamental operating principle of the web. The HTML for this page comes in at around 10KB, which is very, very lightweight.

Regardless, the mobile style will be significantly lighter still.

Is that confirmation .

 

[Kier]

Is that confirmation .

Of..?

 

[dartho]

Of..?

This I'd say:

... the mobile style ...

 

[Cezz]

Of..?

I think he is asking is that confirmation there will be a mobile skin... I may be wrong though as Forsaken tends to talk in riddles.

 

[jdj]

Just how "big" is XenForo?

I tried to check by saving a page locally via Firefox - it was over 400K, and a 2nd page I visited and saved was over 600K all up. That's 1mb for 2 views. That would cost me $2.04 if I visited from my mobile and was paying casual data rates! I know there is caching and stuff for js and css, assuming that IE under Windows Mobile 6.5 fully supports such, but it still seems big - those figures would probably stand for the first visit to a xenforo site.

I'd like to know how to more accurately measure this if anyone has some ideas.

This should also all be kept in mind when developing a mobile style - it's not just appearance, but bandwidth requirements also that needs to be taken into account.

For similar reasons I'm interested in the facility to reply via email. It's not just bandwidth and cost but connectivity; you can sometimes remain engaged in an online conversation via email even when your connection is intermittent. Cost of sending and receiving emails is very low if there are no attachments. I haven't bought xenforo yet but if it could do this for me I'd buy it tomorrow.

 

[Forsaken]

Of..?

I was in a hurry to make something for breakfast, so I should have defined that it was for the mobile style comment .

 

[Erik]

It would be pretty stupid of them not to put it any sort of mobile style at some point, so I think that's a yes. He's saying that once the mobile style is developed, it will be even more lightweight than the regular style.

 

[Forsaken]

It would be pretty stupid of them not to put it any sort of mobile style at some point, so I think that's a yes. He's saying that once the mobile style is developed, it will be even more lightweight than the regular style.

The only response to a mobile skin he gave at any point was that he had considered it, and had some ideas, but never confirmed whether or not there will be one .

 

[iGamer]

Don't know about you all, but this loads 100 times faster on my mobile device than any vB site. If that ain't lite enough, then i don't know what is. lol

 

[Floris]

Mind you saving a page in firefox is NOT the real size ..

It doesn't take into account what is already cached, compressed, or remote linked. IT gets everything an throws it in a rendered container version.

use firebug on firefox to get the true size and speed, etc.