Discuss: Retooling Slashdot with Web Standards Part II
by Daniel M. Frommelt
- Editorial Comments
22 Bandwidth savings not accurate
The article fails to note that Slashdot uses mod_gzip, so most of the data transmitted from the servers is compressed.
So bandwidth savings aren’t nearly as large as the article implies.
Just FYI.
posted at 08:56 am on February 18, 2004 by Robert Accettura
23 Re: Bandwidth savings
Robert:
Mod_gzipped or not, if Slashdot cuts its page weight by retooling with web standards, then the gzipped weight of the page will be smaller.
Factor in millions of users hitting Slashdot every day and the bandwidth savings are considerable.
posted at 09:54 am on February 18, 2004 by apartness
Discussion Closed
New comments are not being accepted, but you are welcome to explore what people said before we closed the door.
Got something to say?
Discuss this article. We reserve the right to delete flames, trolls, and wood nymphs.
Create a new account or sign in below if you’d like to leave a comment.
Subscribe to this article's comments: RSS (what’s this?)






21 Newer browsers
I’m in love with the CSS 2.1 and the media part. But I’ve noticed a problem. The newer browsers on PocketPC2003, Smartphone2003 and Palm5.1 accept CSS levels 1 and 2. So even if you use the @import or link types it will show on the newer palms, pocketpcs and smartphones. This is a pain in the ass because the last thing you want to do is download a large background image intended for a css driven site. Anyone else come across this?
posted at 06:52 pm on December 14, 2003 by Ian Forrester