I can rate up this wish - when I wait for the loading start-pages( on a very slow line) I see in the status line a lot of unknown "foreign" sites which are used and loaded down with the wiki pages…
And I am not talking about the CSS themes…

I have rated this up as as on almost every business site I create my client complains about the speed of page loading (even if I am not using a jquery header!). It doesn't make WIkidot look good as a platform.

I have always been convinced that it is the extra calls to the wdfiles server for images that causes this slow loading but it us probably also the calls out cloudfront etc which doesn't help..

Perhaps It would be a good idea ro know ( even for Pro+ accounts) how to make it on ijmportant "start" - pages faster to download with some important tricks ( or "less" of them !). ? .

Yes, and yes…
sometimes I see on some of my sites ( forgott if they are private) google adsense or anaylzing features for some seconds on the status part.

or the "cloud" with different parts on the wdfiles server ( css layout/themes)

I mean - it woiuld be very good to know how we can minimze the source code for the most important "start" pages - as an example:
with or without nav:top or nav:side ( extra reads) ,
or make our nav-side-menu for these pages by our own "div" ( left or right) - if this makes the download faster..

The quesrtion is - where is "the time lost" - in reading the diferent sour codes of

• themes (CSS) ,
• wdfiles for images,
• account setup for rights
• site setup for different site "language"

and so on.

Could be the outcome is that best environment is

• an english site ( without translation)
• without side bar on the most important pages ( deeper it can not be a such a problem to await)
• without great images ( small ones)
• or better without images general
• using a stanndard theme wihtout any "circus"

and so on…
Would be interessting to hear from the developers what is the best (fastetst) way of site-setup !

(EDIT:
idea: would it be faster to upload images to webshots ( or any other internet -provider) and load them from the external location?)

this is important. google factors in page loading speed in its results. also, the listpages slowness really reallyyy needs to be fixed. you don't have to wait more than a few milliseconds to see an amazon.com page listing hundreds of products. on wikidot this would take like 6 seconds. i'm guessing that's just how it's built and puts a lot of stress on the server capacity already, but it is a big limitation.

I am sure the developers know about this but I'll mention it anyway. Google has a useful page speed analysis tool which makes suggestions as to improving page speed and assigns them priorities from high to low. By the way, one of the biggest seems to be to "minimize redirects" which does involve the css themes. Ads also cause this warning (which there is not much to be done about but to remove the ads).

The medium priority ones are to "leverage browser caching" and iframes and images are mentioned in this a lot, as in: The following cacheable resources have a short freshness lifetime. Specify an expiration at least one week in the future for the following resources"

All sorts of image suggestions come up. And also "defer parsing of javascript".

I don't know if any of this is fixable for wikidot. Here is the url of the tool: https://developers.google.com/speed/pagespeed/

My newer site, by the way, culinarylore, scored an 89 out of 100 for the start page. Which is not bad. Gustrength.com got an 88 out of 100. But the tool does not actually measure the time it takes the page too load, it just looks for things that would theoretically improve page loading time. So, as far as the actual time, I don't know if improving the score really improves the time. However, it includes a "Critical Path Explorer" which seems to give times when certain elements are loading and their order.

A frequent suggestion of the tool, which anybody can start doing right now, is to make images the size you want them to be and not to have the browser resize them. This DOES help, at least according to the tool. I was able to improve the loading time of several of my pages by resizing the images and eliminating the forced sizing in the image code. And there are also some low priority things that we can do. Every little bit helps.

Would this wish be considered "incidentally completed"?

I'd like to give it a couple of weeks of bedding in first before it's marked as completed.

I would now be happy to see this wish marked as completed. The change to AWS has certainly made a dramatic and welcome improvement to page loading speeds. which is great news.

As a general note, all uploaded files are now cachable by the browser and load significantly faster than code blocks. This means that uploading stylesheets and embedded HTML files rather than using [[code]] blocks should improve load times even more.