Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors.
Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker.
-
Web Guru
Originally Posted by
Benny Smyth
With regards to the video, it's one of the first questions I asked about when the idea was put forward to me. I was told initially that it would just be a picture but since then, Apple have apparently made an update that allows video to be streamed (so not a work around).
You're right, that restriction has been relaxed and muted video is now allowed to autoplay (latest iOS and Chrome), but I'd still consider a 60Mb payload to be out of order, IMHO.
Originally Posted by
Benny Smyth
I guess, ideally, I'd like to see it be a pic for data but a video for when connected to Wi-fi, but I guess that's not doable?
Even if it was doable (which I don't think it is), it wouldn't be reliable. There are times when a device on WiFi could still be using mobile data further down the line - When not at home my iPad's WiFi connection is actually to the mobile hotspot on my phone, for example, and some people use a mobile dongle in a router rather than have a landline / broadband connection.
Originally Posted by
Benny Smyth
Thinking about it, when would someone look a DJs website on their mobile devices? I'd dare say that it will rarely be while you're on the move and be more likely in the comfort of your own home, where there will be Wi-Fi. Add to that the endless supply of free Wi-Fi spots, maybe it won't eat too much data overall? I watch a lot of videos on my phone, but I only ever use about 200mb a month as I'm always to connected to some sort of Wi-Fi. I'm not saying that I am an accurate representation of every human being on the planet but maybe, in 2017, it's not that much of an issue.
IMHO you shouldn't be making that assumption, or making the decision for people. To some 60Mb is a lot of mobile data, and that's being forced on them when they visit your site. It may not seem a lot to you, but what if they're roaming abroad? On o2, from the USA, it would cost £432 to visit you homepage (if they didn't cap it at £40 / 50Mb).
If I were you I'd autoplay on desktop, but I'd put the first frame (or something else) as a still image on mobiles, with a youtube style play button giving the visitor the choice.
Last edited by Marc J; 09-11-2017 at 02:51 PM.
-
Originally Posted by
Marc J
IMHO you shouldn't be making that assumption, or making the decision for people. To some 60Mb is a lot of mobile data, and that's being forced on them when they visit your site. It may not seem a lot to you, but what if they're roaming abroad?
On o2, from the USA, it would cost £432 to visit you homepage (if they didn't cap it at £40 / 50Mb).
I wonder what PayPal do with their full page video? I've never looked...
Julian
-
Web Guru
Originally Posted by
DJ Jules
I wonder what PayPal do with their full page video? I've never looked...
There's no video on Paypal's home page? 
On https://www.paypal.com/uk/webapps/mpp/personal they do what I suggest above - a still image with an option to view a video. That's on desktop and mobile, as far as I can see.
-
-
Web Guru
-
-
Anyway... I have to say I was blown away by the content, Benny. Awesome video, which I'm assuming didn't play on my phone because it didn't get a chance to load. I'd definitely book you on the back of what I've seen on the unfinished site alone... And I'm a skinflint picky bugger!
There's an outfit up here who have a talking man on their site extolling the virtues of their services. Don't go down that route please - it's so hard to get right & I dunno where that company found their guy but his intonation & word emphasis is just WEIRD which for me defeats the whole point of him being there. It's like there's too much emphasis on words that were bold in his script.. So unnatural looking & sounding. I think you'd have to hire someone in at a very high cost unless you're a seasoned talking to camera type person yourself.
-
Web Guru
I know it's not finished, but I ran http://bennysmyth.bluechilligroup.co.uk/ through PageSpeed Insights and got: -
Mobile: 32/100
Desktop: 35/100
Not great, so I re-did just the home page quickly on a $16 template I've used before and uploaded it to http://bennysmyth.preview-web.uk/ and ran that through the same test: -
Mobile: 74/100
Desktop: 89/100
I also got the video down to 28.5Mb (mostly by reducing it from 1080 to 720) and set it to play only on desktop (which I think you've now done as well). It's not a perfect recreation, I didn't spend much time on it, but it shows where you should be aiming for performance-wise...hope you don't mind!
There's also http://bennysmyth.preview-web.uk/youtube which uses a YouTube hosted background video, with YouTube handling the video quality / streaming (as Gavin mentions Vimeo also does in post #28). This has the added bonus of not costing you in bandwidth but the video does start lower quality (before kicking in to higher quality if the connection can handle it)...but I think the video tends to start a little later than with the self-hosted option...
-
Pic 15
They're all great tbh but as has been touched on - they don't really tie in with the wedding vibe, particularly the colour ones. I suppose it depends on what the rest of the website is going to look like but you cutting about some trendy urban city scape doesn't sell "hey, I'm an experienced wedding DJ used to playing in 5 star hotels and stately homes..."
-
Originally Posted by
Marc J
I know it's not finished, but I ran
http://bennysmyth.bluechilligroup.co.uk/ through PageSpeed Insights and got: -
Mobile: 32/100
Desktop: 35/100
Not great, so I re-did just the home page quickly on a $16 template I've used before and uploaded it to
http://bennysmyth.preview-web.uk/ and ran that through the same test: -
Mobile: 74/100
Desktop: 89/100
I also got the video down to 28.5Mb (mostly by reducing it from 1080 to 720) and set it to play only on desktop (which I think you've now done as well). It's not a perfect recreation, I didn't spend much time on it, but it shows where you should be aiming for performance-wise...hope you don't mind!
There's also
http://bennysmyth.preview-web.uk/youtube which uses a YouTube hosted background video, with YouTube handling the video quality / streaming (as Gavin mentions Vimeo also does in post #28). This has the added bonus of not costing you in bandwidth but the video does start lower quality (before kicking in to higher quality if the connection can handle it)...but I think the video tends to start a little later than with the self-hosted option...
OK - I'm officially confused with Google Page Speed (and in fact, don't actually trust it!)
I'm in the middle of moving hosting providers (eek! It's b
y scary moving from a provider you've been with for the past 5 years).
However, the sites I've moved so far are lightning quick in the browser. It's a noticeable change! The page load is literally instant (including on a mobile with a 3G connection).
However, I ran them through PageSpeed which actually ranks them as poor!!!!! Yes on both desktop and mobile (which is my main source of traffic nowadays)...Google shows a big red speed ranking! 
Apparently I need to turn on compression (done!), enable cacheing (done!) and optimise everything (done!), and yet those sites rank lower in PageSpeed than my old provider?
Anyone know how much this actual metric relates to SERPS?
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
Reply With Quote
I was giving examples of where it's been used elsewhere, to allow others to look at how it's been done "acceptably". As you say, looks like your point has been made as everyone else is coming to the same conclusion. Looks good, but it's only really acceptable on desktop (if at all) because of bandwidth/power requirements.
