Skip to main content

Home/ @Publish/ Group items tagged Page Size

Rss Feed Group items tagged

Pedro Gonçalves

How Website Speed Actually Impacts Search Ranking - Moz - 0 views

  • in 2010, Google did something very different. Google announced website speed would begin having an impact on search ranking. Now, the speed at which someone could view the content from a search result would be a factor.
  • Google's Matt Cutts announced that slow-performing mobile sites would soon be penalized in search rankings as well.
  • While Google has been intentionally unclear in which particular aspect of page speed impacts search ranking, they have been quite clear in stating that content relevancy remains king.
  • ...13 more annotations...
  • When people say"page load time" for a website, they usually mean one of two measurements: "document complete" time or "fully rendered" time. Think of document complete time as the time it takes a page to load before you can start clicking or entering data. All the content might not be there yet, but you can interact with the page. Think of fully rendered time as the time it takes to download and display all images, advertisements, and analytic trackers. This is all the "background stuff" you see fill in as you're scrolling through a page.
  • Since Google was not clear on what page load time means, we examined both the effects of both document complete and fully rendered on search rankings. However our biggest surprise came from the lack of correlation of two key metrics! We expected, if anything, these 2 metrics would clearly have an impact on search ranking. However, our data shows no clear correlation between document complete or fully rendered times with search engine rank, as you can see in the graph below:
  • With no correlation between search ranking and what is traditionally thought of a "page load time" we expanded our search to the Time to First Byte (TTFB). This metric captures how long it takes your browser to receive the first byte of a response from a web server when you request a particular URL. In other words, this metric encompasses the network latency of sending your request to the web server, the amount of time the web server spent processing and generating a response, and amount of time it took to send the first byte of that response back from the server to your browser.
  • The TTFB result was surprising in a clear correlation was identified between decreasing search rank and increasing time to first byte. Sites that have a lower TTFB respond faster and have higher search result rankings than slower sites with a higher TTFB. Of all the data we captured, the TTFB metric had the strongest correlation effect, implying a high likelihood of some level of influence on search ranking.
  • The surprising result here was with the the median size of each web page, in bytes, relative to the search ranking position. By "page size," we mean all of the bytes that were downloaded to fully render the page, including all the images, ads, third party widgets, and fonts. When we graphed the median page size for each search rank position, we found a counterintuitive correlation of decreasing page size to decreasing page rank, with an anomalous dip in the top 3 ranks.
  • Our data shows there is no correlation between "page load time" (either document complete or fully rendered) and ranking on Google's search results page. This is true not only for generic searches (one or two keywords) but also for "long tail" searches (4 or 5 keywords) as well. We did not see websites with faster page load times ranking higher than websites with slower page load times in any consistent fashion. If Page Load Time is a factor in search engine rankings, it is being lost in the noise of other factors. We had hoped to see some correlation especially for generic one- or two-word queries. Our belief was that the high competition for generic searches would make smaller factors like page speed stand out more.
  • our data shows there is a correlation between lower time-to-first-byte (TTFB) metrics and higher search engine rankings. Websites with servers and back-end infrastructure that could quickly deliver web content had a higher search ranking than those that were slower. This means that, despite conventional wisdom, it is back-end website performance and not front-end website performance that directly impacts a website's search engine ranking.
  • We suspect over time, though, that page rendering time will also factor into rankings due to the high indication of the importance of user experience.
  • TTFB is affected by 3 factors: The network latency between a visitor and the server. How heavily loaded the web server is. How quickly the website's back end can generate the content.
  • Websites can lower network latency by utilizing Content Distribution Networks (CDNs). CDNs can quickly deliver content to all visitors, often regardless of geographic location, in a greatly accelerated manner.
  • Do these websites rank highly because they have better back-end infrastructure than other sites? Or do they need better back-end infrastructure to handle the load of ALREADY being ranked higher? While both are possible, our conclusion is that sites with faster back ends receive a higher rank, and not the other way around.
  • The back-end performance of a website directly impacts search engine ranking. The back end includes the web servers, their network connections, the use of CDNs, and the back-end application and database servers. Website owners should explore ways to improve their TTFB. This includes using CDNs, optimizing your application code, optimizing database queries, and ensuring you have fast and responsive web servers.
  • Fast websites have more visitors, who visit more pages, for longer period of times, who come back more often, and are more likely to purchase products or click ads. In short, faster websites make users happy, and happy users promote your website through linking and sharing. All of these things contribute to improving search engine rankings.
Pedro Gonçalves

6 Free Chrome Apps and Extensions for Small Businesses : Technology :: American Express... - 0 views

Pedro Gonçalves

Standards and benchmarks - 0 views

  • The average top 1,000 web page is 1575 KB.
  • Page growth is a major reason why we keep finding, quarter after quarter, that pages are getting slower. And faster networks are not a cure-all for the challenges of page bloat.
  • According to Akamai’s most recent quarterly State of the Internet report, the global average connection speed among the top 50 internet-using countries is 3.3 Mbps — a 5.2% increase over the previous quarter. But when we’re seeing year-over-year page growth ranging from 45-50%, it’s easy to see that the gap is widening.
  • ...16 more annotations...
  • A whopping 804 KB per page is comprised of images. Three years ago, images comprised just 372 KB of a page’s total payload.
  • images are one of the single greatest impediments to front-end performance. All too often, they’re either in the wrong format or they’re uncompressed or they’re not optimized to load progressively — or all of the above.
  • Today, 38% of pages use Flash, compared to 52% in 2010. This is a good thing. Nothing against Flash, per se, but if Apple has no plans ever to support it, its obsolescence is inevitable in our increasingly mobile-first world.
  • use of custom fonts has exploded — from 1% in 2010 to 33% today.
  • But custom fonts have a dark side: they can incur a significant performance penalty.
  • These days, images on the web have to work hard. They need to be high-res enough to satisfy users with retina displays, and they also need to be small enough in size that they don’t blow your mobile data cap in one fell swoop. Responsive web design attempts to navigate this tricky terrain, with varying degrees of success.
  • Google published findings, based on Google Analytics data, which suggest that load times have gotten marginally faster for desktop users, and up to 30% faster for mobile users.
  • Here at Strangeloop/Radware, we’ve found the opposite. Using WebPagetest, we’ve been testing the same 2,000 top Alexa-ranked ecommerce sites since 2010, and our data tells us that top ecommerce pages have gotten 22% slower in the past year.
  • This quick-and-dirty case study illustrates how network speed doesn’t directly correlate to load time. For example, download bandwidth increases 333% from DSL (1.5Mbps) to cable (5Mbps), yet the performance gain is only 12%.
  • Move scripts to the bottom of the page
  • It’s better to move scripts from the top to as low in the page as possible. One reason is to enable progressive rendering, but another is to achieve greater download parallelization.
  • Make JavaScript and CSS external
  • If users on your site have multiple page views per session and many of your pages re-use the same scripts and stylesheets, you could potentially benefit from cached external files. Pages that have few (perhaps only one) page view per session may find that inlining JavaScript and CSS results in faster end-user response times.
  • Reduce DNS lookups
  • Minify JavaScript
  • In addition to minifying external scripts, you can also minify inlined script blocks. Even if you’re already gzipping your scripts, minifying them will still reduce the size by at least 5%.
Pedro Gonçalves

Note to Yahoo!: Tumblr not a Platform for Brands, Yet | Optim.al - 0 views

  • Of the 10,600+ brands we examine on a daily basis (see optimalsocial.com/portfolios for more on these across 100 sectors), we see about 2,400 (just less than 25%) have a tumblr presence.
  • 25% of these are mostly empty and many appear to be brands squatting on their own names and planning to get to it later when they have time, perhaps. About 588 of these brand pages have fewer than 10 items of lifetime activity. Some brands like Pepsi are quite active, though the activity levels ebb and flow quite a bit, but others are far less so. The mean number of total engagements per brand on tumblr is 224 but the median is just two. Tumblr hasn’t yet figured out how to get users to engage with brands, yet, and it doesn’t seem that users are falling over themselves to engage with brands.
  • Tumblr’s content distribution model still needs to be sorted out, in order for brands to truly achieve viral distribution and authentic connections with consumers
Pedro Gonçalves

Eyetrack III - What You Most Need to Know - 0 views

  • visual breaks -- like a line or rule -- discouraged people from looking at items beyond the break, like a blurb. (This also affects ads
  • We found that when people look at blurbs under headlines on news homepages, they often only look at the left one-third of the blurb. In other words, most people just look at the first couple of words -- and only read on if they are engaged by those words.
  • People typically scan down a list of headlines, and often don't view entire headlines. If the first words engage them, they seem likely to read on. On average, a headline has less than a second of a site visitor's attention.
  • ...17 more annotations...
  • For headlines -- especially longer ones -- it would appear that the first couple of words need to be real attention-grabbers if you want to capture eyes.
  • The same goes for blurbs -- perhaps even more so. Our findings about blurbs suggest that not only should they be kept short, but the first couple of words need to grab the viewer's attention.
  • Average blurb length varies from a low of about 10 words to a high of 25, with most sites coming in around 17.
  • Eyetrack III found that people do typically look beyond the first screen. What happens, however, is that their eyes typically scan lower portions of the page seeking something to grab their attention. Their eyes may fixate on an interesting headline or a stand-out word, but not on other content. Again, this points to the necessity of sharp headline writing.
  • Navigation placed at the top of a homepage performed best -- that is, it was seen by the highest percentage of test subjects and looked at for the longest duration.
  • It might surprise you to learn that in our testing we observed better usage (more eye fixations and longer viewing duration) with right-column navigation than left. While this might have been the novelty factor at play -- people aren't used to seeing right-side navigation -- it may indicate that there's no reason not to put navigation on the right side of the page and use the left column for editorial content or ads.
  • Most news sites run articles with medium-length paragraphs -- somewhere (loosely) around 45-50 words, or two or three sentences.
  • Shorter paragraphs performed better in Eyetrack III research than longer ones. Our data revealed that stories with short paragraphs received twice as many overall eye fixations as those with longer paragraphs. The longer paragraph format seems to discourage viewing.
  • the standard one-column format performed better in terms of number of eye fixations
  • What about photos on article pages? It might surprise you that our test subjects typically looked at text elements before their eyes landed on an accompanying photo, just like on homepages. As noted earlier, the reverse behavior (photos first) occurred in previous print eyetracking studies.
  • Finally, there's the use of summary descriptions (extended deck headlines, paragraph length) leading into articles. These were popular with our participants. When our testers encountered a story with a boldface introductory paragraph, 95 percent of them viewed all or part of it.
  • When people viewed an introductory paragraph for between 5 and 10 seconds -- as was often the case -- their average reading behavior of the rest of the article was about the same as when they viewed articles without a summary paragraph. The summary paragraph made no difference in terms of how much of the story was consumed.
  • The first thing we noticed is that people often ignore ads, but that depends a lot on placement. When they do gaze at an ad, it's usually for only 0.5 to 1.5 seconds. Good placement and the right format can improve those figures.
  • We found that ads in the top and left portions of a homepage received the most eye fixations. Right side ads didn't do as well, and ads at the bottom of the page were seen, typically, by only a small percentage of people.
  • Close proximity to popular editorial content really helped ads get seen. We noticed that when an ad was separated from editorial matter by either white space or a rule, the ad received fewer fixations than when there was no such barrier. Ads close to top-of-the-page headlines did well. A banner ad above the homepage flag didn't draw as many fixations as an ad that was below the flag and above editorial content.
  • Text ads were viewed most intently, of all the types we tested. On our test pages, text ads got an average eye duration time of nearly 7 seconds; the best display-type ad got only 1.6 seconds, on average.
  • Size matters. Bigger ads had a better chance of being seen. Small ads on the right side of homepages typically were seen by only one-third of our testers; the rest never once cast an eye on them. On article pages, "half-page" ads were the most intensely viewed by our test subjects. Yet, they were only seen 38 percent of the time; most people never looked at them. Article ads that got seen the most were ones inset into article text. "Skyscraper" ads (thin verticals running in the left or right column) came in third place.
Pedro Gonçalves

Studies show more than 40 percent decreased organic reach on Facebook - Inside Facebook - 0 views

  • Earlier this month, Facebook noted that pages could see a decrease in organic reach as a result of News Feed algorithm tweaks that favor newsworthy posts. However, many marketers and Facebook page admins are reporting that they’re seeing an extreme drop in organic reach — as much as 44 percent in some cases — and it has been going on for months.
  • Komfo, a social marketing firm, studied fan penetration among 5,000 Facebook pages of various sizes from August through November with the following findings: 42% decrease in fan penetration 31% increase in viral amplification 28% increase in clickthrough rate (CTR)
  • In Komfo we do not doubt that the survey shows that there is no “free lunch” on Facebook anymore, and companies have to start investing in Facebook advertising if they want to reach the right audience with their content. However, it also shows that the Facebook’s algorithms, that control what we see in our newsfeed, have been improved. Facebook has become better at showing a page’s content to the most engaged users. Jim Tobin, President of Ignite Social Media, also saw significant drops in organic reach. In a study of 689 posts of 21 large brand pages found that in the week of Facebook’s announcement, organic reach dipped an average of 44 percent. Tobin pointed out that the previously accepted reach percentage of 16 percent can now be as low as 3 percent.
Pedro Gonçalves

New Defaults In Web Design - How Much Has The Web Really Changed? | Smashing Magazine - 0 views

  • Many mouseover interactions are completely dysfunctional on a touch device
  • Instead of buying a state of the art monitor, buying a cheap monitor and several low-end devices to test your work on might be a better investment.
  • Hiding content and showing it on mouseover was considered to be a decent design pattern
  • ...13 more annotations...
  • When you hover over a menu item, a submenu appears. But apart from hovering over an item, you can also simply click on it to follow the link. Now, what should happen when you tap on the item with a touch device? Should the submenus appear, or should the link activate? Or both? Or should something else happen? On iOS, something else happens. The first time you tap a link like that, the submenu appears; in other words, the hover event fires. You have to tap a second time to actually follow the link. This is confusing, and not many people will tap a second time. On Android, the submenu appears and the link is followed simultaneously. I don’t have to explain to you that this is confusing.
  • It’s very well possible to think of complex solutions11 whereby you define different interactions for different input devices. But the better solution, I think, is to make sure that the default interaction, the activate event, just works for everybody. If you really need to, you could choose to enhance this default experience for certain users.
  • The same principle that we follow for interactions — whereby we design the activate event first and enhance it later — applies to graphic design. We should start designing the things that we know everyone will see. That’s the content. No matter how big or small a screen is and no matter how minimal the feature set of a browser, it will be able to show letters.
  • rather than pollute the page with all kinds of links to get people out of there, we should really focus on that thing in the middle. Make sure it works. Make sure it looks good. Make sure it’s readable.
  • you start by designing the relationship between the different font sizes.
  • When the typography is done, you would start designing the layout for bigger screens; you can think of this as an enhancement for people with bigger screens. And after that, when the different layouts are done, you could add the paint. And by paint, I mean color, gradients, borders, etc.
  • When I say to start with typography, I don’t mean that you aren’t allowed to think about paint at the same time. Rather, I’m trying to find the things that all of these different devices, with all of their different screen sizes and all of their different features, have in common. It just seems logical to first design this shared core thoroughly. The strange thing is that this core is often overlooked: Web professionals tend to view their own creations with top-of-the-line devices with up-to-date browsers. They see only the enhancements. The shared core with the basic experience is often invisible.
  • All of the things we created first — the navigation, the widgets, the footer — they all helped the visitor to leave the page. But the visitor probably wanted to be there! That was weird.
  • To build a responsive website that works on all kinds of screens, designing for a small screen first is easiest. It forces you to focus on what’s really important: if it doesn’t fit in this small square, it is probably not terribly important. It forces you to think better about hierarchy, about the right order of components on the page.
  • Once you’re done with the content, you can start to ask yourself whether this content needs a header. Or a logo. Or subnavigation. Does it need navigation at all? And does it really need all of those widgets? The answer to that last question is “No.” I’ve never understood what those widgets are for. I have never seen a useful widget. I have never seen a widget that’s better than white space.
  • does the logo really need to be at the top16 of every page? It could very well go in the footer on many websites
  • the option to add extra luggage to a flight booking might be most effective right there in the overview of the flight, instead of in the middle of a list of links somewhere on the left of the page.
  • does the main navigation look more important than the main content? Most of the time it shouldn’t be, and I usually consider the navigation to be footer content.
Pedro Gonçalves

The Ideal Length for All Online Content - 0 views

  • 100 characters is the engagement sweet spot for a tweet. 
  • a spike in retweets among those in the 71-100 character range—so-called “medium” length tweets. These medium tweets have enough characters for the original poster to say something of value and for the person retweeting to add commentary as well.
  • the ultra-short 40-character posts received 86 percent higher engagement than others.
  • ...12 more annotations...
  • In the last update, Google changed the layout of posts so that you only see three lines of the original post before you see “Read more” link. In other words, your first sentence has to be a gripping teaser to get people to click “Read More.”
  • The ideal length of a Google+ headline is less than 60 characters To maximize the readability and appearance of your posts on Google+, you may want to keep your text on one line.
  • Many different studies over the years have confirmed that shorter posts are better on Facebook.
  • Writing for KISSmetrics, headline expert Bnonn cites usability research revealing we don’t only scan body copy, we also scan headlines. As such, we tend to absorb only the first three words and the last three words of a headline. If you want to maximize the chance that your entire headline gets read, keep your headline to six words.
  • some of the highest-converting headlines on the web are as long as 30 words. As a rule, if it won’t fit in a tweet it’s too long. But let me suggest that rather than worrying about length you should worry about making every word count. Especially the first and last 3.
  • The ideal length of a blog post is 7 minutes, 1,600 words
  • to ensure maximum comprehension and the appearance of simplicity, the perfect line length ranges between 40 and 55 characters per line, or in other words, a content column that varies between 250-350 pixels wide (it depends on font size and choice).
  • Consider that shorter lines appear as less work for the reader; they make it easier to focus and to jump quickly from one line to the next. Opening paragraphs with larger fonts—and therefore fewer characters per line—are like a a running start to reading a piece of content. This style gets readers  hooked with an easy-to-read opening paragraph, then you can adjust the line width from there.
  • In September 2012, MailChimp published the following headline on its blog: Subject Line Length Means Absolutely Nothing. This was quite the authoritative statement, but MailChimp had the data to back it up.
  • Beyond the perfect length, you can also adhere to best practices. In general, a 50-character maximum is recommended, although MailChimp does point out that there can be exceptions: The general rule of thumb in email marketing is to keep your subject line to 50 characters or less. Our analysis found this to generally be the rule. The exception was for highly targeted audiences, where the reader apparently appreciated the additional information in the subject line.
  • The ideal length of a title tag is 55 characters Title tags are the bits of text that define your page on a search results page. Brick-and-mortar stores have business names; your web page has a title tag. Recent changes to the design of Google’s results pages mean that the maximum length for titles is around 60 characters. If your title exceeds 60 characters, it will get truncated with an ellipse.
  • Finding a hard-and-fast rule for the maximum recommendation of a title tag isn’t as easy as you’d think. Quick typography lesson: Google uses Arial for the titles on its results pages, Arial is a proportionally-spaced font, meaning that different letters take up different width. A lowercase “i” is going to be narrower than a lowercase “w.” Therefore, the actual letters in your title will change the maximum allowable characters that can fit on one line.
Pedro Gonçalves

Facebook Studio :: Blog | Introducing Graph Search: Help People Discover your Business ... - 0 views

  • The name, category, vanity URL, and information you share in the “About” section all help people find your business and should be shared on Facebook. If you have a location or a local place Page, update your address to make sure you can appear as a result when someone is searching for a specific location. Focus on attracting the right fans to your Page and on giving your fans a reason to interact with your content on an ongoing basis.
Pedro Gonçalves

Twitter Is About To Officially Launch Retargeted Ads [Update: Confirmed] | TechCrunch - 0 views

  • Twitter has confirmed our scoop with the announcement of Tailored Audiences - its name for retargeted ads. Available globally to all advertisers via a slew of adtech startup partners, advertisers will be able to target recent visitors to their websites with retargeted Promoted Tweets and Promoted Accounts.
  • Twitter’s users are on mobile. Seventy percent of its ad revenue already comes from the small screens, and it likely follows that a majority of engagement is on mobile, too.
  • retargeting happens like this. You visit a website, say a travel booking site, and look at a page for buying a flight to Hawaii. You chicken out at the last minute, don’t buy, and navigate away, but the site has dropped a cookie for that Hawaii flight page on your browser. Then, when you visit other sites or social networks that run retargeted ads, they detect that cookie, and the travel site can show you an ad saying “It’s cold in SF. Wouldn’t a vacation to Hawaii be nice?” to try to get you to pull the trigger and buy the flight it knows you were already interested in. But without cookies on mobile, you can’t retarget there… …unless you can tie the identity of a mobile user to what they do on the computer. And Twitter can. It’s one of the few hugely popular services that individuals access from multiple types of devices.
  • ...5 more annotations...
  • Essentially, when you log into your account on your full-size computer, Twitter will analyze the cookies in your browser to see where you’ve been on the non-mobile web. Then, when you log in to that same account on mobile, it can still use your web cookies to hit you with retargeted ads.
  • mobile phones don’t have the ability to set cookies so you can’t do retargeting.
  • Facebook only recently began allowing retargeted ads on mobile, and only through a “custom audiences” targeting program separate from FBX.
  • Lucky for Twitter, most of what people do on it is public, so it doesn’t spark the same privacy concerns as Facebook. Twitter also offers an opt-out of retargeting under Promoted Content on its Security And Privacy settings page. Plus it honors Do Not Track for users that enable it in their browsers.
  • It’s also recently opened up keyword targeting so advertisers can reach people who’ve tweeted certain words. Between keyword targeting and cookie retargeting, Twitter is breaking out of the demand generation and into the lucrative demand fulfillment part of the advertising funnel where Google’s search ad business lives. Advertisers are willing to pay top dollar if you can deliver them someone ready to buy their product. And there’s no better sign of someone’s intent to buy than having recently visited a site and almost made the purchase already. Cookies could be very tasty for Twitter.
Pedro Gonçalves

How To Make Your Websites Faster On Mobile Devices | Smashing Mobile - 0 views

  • A recent study (PDF) found that more than 80% of people are disappointed with the experience of browsing Web on mobile devices and would use their smartphones more if the browsing experience improved.
  • A recent study (PDF) found that more than 80% of people are disappointed with the experience of browsing Web on mobile devices and would use their smartphones more if the browsing experience improved.
  • 64% of smartphone users expect websites to load in 4 seconds or less, while the average website takes more than twice that amount, at 9 seconds.
  • ...3 more annotations...
  • On a desktop, only 20% of the time it takes to display a Web page comes from downloading files. The rest of the time is spent processing HTTP requests and loading style sheets, script files and images. It takes even longer on a smartphone because its CPU, memory and cache size are much smaller than a desktop’s.
  • Having a fast website is all about making the hard decisions and getting rid of what’s not at the core of your experience. If it doesn’t add a lot of value, remove it.
  • Reduce DependenciesFewer files to download means fewer HTTP requests and faster loading times. Reduce Image DimensionsOn top of the extra download time, precious processing power and memory are used to resize high-resolution images. Reduce Client-Side ProcessingRethinking the use of JavaScript and keeping it to a minimum are best.
Pedro Gonçalves

Content Knowledge Is Power | Smashing Magazine - 0 views

  • content-out design4 — the concept of determining how your design should shift for varying displays by focusing not on screen sizes, but on where your content naturally breaks down.
  • if you want to ready your content to be more flexible and adaptable, then you can’t just look at each page individually. You need to start finding patterns in the content.
  • Each bit of structure you add gives you options: new abilities to control how and where content should be presented to best support its meaning and purpose.
Pedro Gonçalves

The Attention Economy is Now the Location Economy | Endless Innovation | Big Think - 0 views

  • The Attention Economy paradigm was, in many ways, the fundamental building block for understanding the rise of social media and social networking. This paradigm rested on a simple, but amazingly robust, observation – that the scarce resource in our information overload world was attention.
  • in an information-rich world, the wealth of information means a dearth of something else: a scarcity of whatever it is that information consumes. What information consumes is rather obvious: it consumes the attention of its recipients. Hence a wealth of information creates a poverty of attention and a need to allocate that attention efficiently among the overabundance of information sources that might consume it."
  • attention is no longer the scarce resource in the world of the mobile Internet - it's location
  • ...3 more annotations...
  • This should be intuitively obvious – you can only be in one place at one time – what could be scarcer than that? And, as more people use their smart phones and tablets to access the Internet, location will become ever more important.
  • Location matters a whole lot more than Attention these days. When you shrink the size of the screen, it has an impact on Attention. The smaller the screen, the fewer outlets you have for your attention at one time. You may tolerate scrolling tickers on the bottom of a huge screen, but not on a tiny mobile screen.
  • The next time you’re on the subway, or relaxing on a park bench or hanging out at a restaurant, take a look around and notice how people are interacting with their mobile devices. They are laser-focused on a single tiny screen at one time. Ask them how many apps they have open at one time – most likely, it's just one. They're not multi-tasking, they're single-tasking with a single screen while simultaneously beaming out their GPS location. If the "social" revolution that brought us Web 2.0 was all about Attention, then the new mobile revolution will be all about Location.
Pedro Gonçalves

Angular, Ember, And Backbone: Which JavaScript Framework Is Right For You? - ReadWrite - 0 views

  • Ember’s library size and support network are its two greatest strengths, but if you’re only trying to create a small widget or single-page app, it might be overkill for you. If you’re working on a multipage, navigational, long-term project, Ember might be your pick.
Pedro Gonçalves

The Line Length Misconception | Viget - 0 views

  • Anything from 45 to 75 characters is widely-regarded as a satisfactory length of line for a single-column page set in a serifed text face in a text size. The 66-character line (counting both letters and spaces) is widely regarded as ideal.
1 - 16 of 16
Showing 20 items per page