The Web Design Group

... Making the Web accessible to all.

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Reduce Load Times with iFrames?, Do iFrames reduce initial page load times?
davidmichaelangelo
post Oct 12 2011, 02:19 PM
Post #1





Group: Members
Posts: 2
Joined: 12-October 11
Member No.: 15,610



I created a page that dynamically updates an iFrame depending on variables passed through the URL.
You can see the page here: http://www.bluelinkerp.com/corporate/clientlist.asp

My question is: does this reduce the page load time?

It may seem like a stupid question but it seems to me like there is only one iFrame loaded at a time (a user needs to click another link to load a different iFrame).

This is an effective way of reducing the size of a page, right?

This post has been edited by davidmichaelangelo: Oct 12 2011, 02:19 PM
User is offlinePM
Go to the top of the page
Toggle Multi-post QuotingQuote Post
Darin McGrew
post Oct 12 2011, 02:33 PM
Post #2


WDG Member
********

Group: Root Admin
Posts: 8,021
Joined: 4-August 06
From: Mountain View, CA
Member No.: 3



In a sense, you might consider it "reducing the size of a page" because you're trading one big page for multiple smaller pages.

But ultimately, the browser has to download all the smaller pages anyway, so the total "size of the page" isn't any smaller.


--------------------
Darin McGrew
WDG Member since 1998
User is offlinePM
Go to the top of the page
Toggle Multi-post QuotingQuote Post
pandy
post Oct 12 2011, 02:41 PM
Post #3


Don't like donuts. Don't do MySpace.
********

Group: WDG Moderators
Posts: 15,571
Joined: 9-August 06
Member No.: 6



In fact the total size is a little larger and there are two requests to the server instead of one. Not that the difference will be noticeable, but I'd say the frame version would be the slower. And there are of course problems with frames. You don't use alt text for the logos (you should). But if you did, what page would you like search engines to find? This http://www.bluelinkerp.com/corporate/clien...-wholesale.html or this http://www.bluelinkerp.com/corporate/clientlist.asp ?


--------------------
"Never go to excess, but let moderation be your guide."
- Cicero

IPB Image
User is offlinePM
Go to the top of the page
Toggle Multi-post QuotingQuote Post
davidmichaelangelo
post Oct 28 2011, 03:22 PM
Post #4





Group: Members
Posts: 2
Joined: 12-October 11
Member No.: 15,610



QUOTE(pandy @ Oct 12 2011, 03:41 PM) *

In fact the total size is a little larger and there are two requests to the server instead of one. Not that the difference will be noticeable, but I'd say the frame version would be the slower. And there are of course problems with frames. You don't use alt text for the logos (you should). But if you did, what page would you like search engines to find? This http://www.bluelinkerp.com/corporate/clien...-wholesale.html or this http://www.bluelinkerp.com/corporate/clientlist.asp ?


Thanks for the help. So you are saying that when you land on a page with a dynamic iFrame, the browser automatically downloads all of the pages? Because the html code is written using ASP depending on the parameters set in the URL, I thought it was a safe bet that the browser would only be "aware" of one iFrame at a time. I do not see how it could possibly download all of the individual pages . . .

The other benefit to this approach is that I can maintain each page separately instead of having one HUGE page loaded with embedded content and have to sort through all the code.

Does it make sense?
User is offlinePM
Go to the top of the page
Toggle Multi-post QuotingQuote Post
pandy
post Oct 28 2011, 04:05 PM
Post #5


Don't like donuts. Don't do MySpace.
********

Group: WDG Moderators
Posts: 15,571
Joined: 9-August 06
Member No.: 6



No, I'm saying that with a normal static page that has an iframe two requests are made to the server and two pages are loaded, the main page and the page in the iframe. There is also more HTML since each document needs HEAD and so on.

If you load a new document with a only a part changed instead of using an iframe, most things that matter size-wise should already be cached. Images, style sheets, scripts. Provided you use external style sheets and scripts of course. The only gain is that the text doesn't have to be reloaded, but text doesn't weigh much compared to even the tiniest of images and as said the framed document adds HTML (HEAD and so on). I don't think the dynamic part changes any of this.

Add to that the inherent problems with frames. I don't think it's worth it even if it would be a few msec faster which I don't think it is.


--------------------
"Never go to excess, but let moderation be your guide."
- Cicero

IPB Image
User is offlinePM
Go to the top of the page
Toggle Multi-post QuotingQuote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



- Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 31st October 2014 - 02:39 AM