Topic: Loading Times - 2.1.3. vs. 2.1.2

Wondered if anyone could offer some advice ?

Had been using SV Pro 2.1.2. successfully, with the galleries on my site loading quickly. However, due to appearance issues on the iPad / iPod, I upgraded to 2.1.3 to use the new thumbnails option. However, loading times for the site on PC are now significantly longer (ca. 10 secs compared to 2 secs). Times are OK for iPad.

Pre-loading is set to "Page" & the filesizes are small - thumbs are 3Kb - 4 Kb (75 x 75) & main images are 30Kb - 100Kb (693 x 520). Is quick to load when viewed offline or once cached.

Does seem to point to my host, but this only occurred after upgrading to 2.1.3. However, I have re-published an existing gallery in the free / trial copy of SV Builder 2.1.2, loaded the files to my host & am back to the 2 seconds to fully present the thumbs / images on screen.

An example URL is … athers.htm

This page is built using the Pro version.

Any advice would be hugely appreciated as, currently, the times to load will be causing people to leave the page.

Many thanks...

Re: Loading Times - 2.1.3. vs. 2.1.2

I've just opened your page in Firefox, Safari and Chrome and the time from entering the URL in the address bar to being able to see the first main image was approximately 3 seconds in all browsers. It was slightly longer (approximately 4 seconds) in IE9 but nothing like 10 seconds.
You are doing the right thing in keeping your main image file sizes at realistic levels for web use and setting imagePreloading="PAGE" should not be an issue for a gallery with only four small thumbnails.
Perhaps your web server and/or internet connection were not performing at their best but all seems OK just now for me as a viewer of your gallery.

Steven Speirs
SimpleViewer Support Team

Re: Loading Times - 2.1.3. vs. 2.1.2

I noticed your web server is taking around 5 seconds to serve the 'simpleviewer.js' file. This seems high for a 100K file.

You could contact your server admin regarding download speeds. Also there is the option to have the server gZip the JS files. This can reduce download times by up to 75%. Please contact your server admin about this, or check here: … mpression/

Felix Turner
SimpleViewer Support Team.

Re: Loading Times - 2.1.3. vs. 2.1.2

Thanks Steven / Felix.

I have approached my hosting company to ask for their comment / advice.

The confusing part is that with SV 2.1.2 there is no delay (have republished the same galleries using the old version, uploaded & all works perfectly) so is only since installing the upgrade (which I need for iPad etc.) that the problems have arisen. Also, the delays seem to affect the background images to my page as well, which usually load immediately (very small files), so the delays are two-fold (again, this only happens with 2.1.3 galleries - static non-gallery files are instant in 2.1.2).

Will let you know as soon as my host replies....

Thanks again...

Re: Loading Times - 2.1.3. vs. 2.1.2

Just a quick update...

My hosting company are saying that files are appearing fine for them & suggesting my DSL speed could be to blame. Am getting 6Mb downstream & the files are small, so still not sure what's happening - is the same when tried on friends' DSL connections & a range of OS / browsers. Have gone back to my host asking for options & whether compression is possible...

As mentioned before, even the GIF's which appear in the background (which are not part of the SV files) are delayed in being presented, but once present there is still a delay of around 5 seconds before the 'progress bar' appears to show that SV is loading (which Felix commented was the same as he experienced).

All was fine with 2.1.2 & no delays were incurred in any part of the page being presented - has all only happened after using 2.1.3 (which I need for presentation for iPads, etc).

Will keep you posted, but any other thoughts would be appreciated...

Re: Loading Times - 2.1.3. vs. 2.1.2

All was fine with 2.1.2 & no delays were incurred in any part of the page being presented - has all only happened after using 2.1.3

This is surprising since there has not been much change to the size of the files between 2.1.2 and 2.1.3. Possibly something else has changed on your web server?

Please look at my previous response for suggestions on how to improve your download speeds.

Felix Turner
SimpleViewer Support Team.