Why Should You Be Thinking About Removing Your Social Widgets
Most websites have widgets from social networking sites to increase user engagement, well when one user like share tweet or gives a +1 in Google plus, few his friends are notified so if their friends are interested they will also see your webpages thats how social networking work for website owners but this article analyze the social widgets and make you consider to remove them from your website
but consider yourself as a user while reading the following analytics and think…
You have added like buttons and follow buttons do you know how much bandwidth they suck from a user & are they optimized Noo mostly no 90% of the time this is the answer, like advertisements all they care is delivering it but devs never optimize the codes
This is the Google+ Badge for Owl Reporter, from the widget you can see its loading profile picture and cover image of Google+ page but they are some scripts being loaded too, but Expiration header of those scripts are 30min or 60min. “Setting an expiry date or a maximum age in the HTTP headers for static resources instructs the browser to load previously downloaded resources from local disk rather than over the network” this is a suggestion from Google page-speed but they don’t follow it. all scripts weight 298.4KB (You can check this from Pingdom test report of “Google+ Badge” from Page Analysis tab), Imagine a user visiting your website periodically every hour, every time when he visits he is loading 298.4 KB, in 24 hours he would have wasted 7.1616 megabytes, yes thats true its a waste, imagine that he clicked ‘Follow’ button when he visited your website for the 9th time for the next 16 times widget is going to be loaded thats actually 4.7744 megabytes.
7MB does that even matter?
Yes definitely but you must read this post completely to understand that.
What about the rest?
Facebook widget, data hungry monster, Pagespeed insight report shows Enable compression for the following resources to reduce their transfer size by 393KiB (71% reduction). Well facebook must consider that.
Compressing https://static.xx.fbcdn.net/rsrc.php/v2/yD/r/HGn8hBI3kT0.js could save 231KiB (72% reduction). Compressing http://connect.facebook.net/en_US/sdk.js could save 119KiB (69% reduction). Compressing http://staticxx.facebook.com/connect/xd_arbiter.php?version=42 could save 21.5KiB (65% reduction). Compressing https://staticxx.facebook.com/connect/xd_arbiter.php?version=42 could save 21.5KiB (65% reduction).
Well twitter widget was optimized but a script had only 30 min expiration time weights 87KB
Pintrest also have some issues like browser caching & unoptimized images being served from pintrest caches