avatar kb limit.

[beth]

i was just wondering if there was anyway habbox would consider raising the kb limit on avatars? i'm not talking about the actual 150 x 150 size of the avatar i mean the 100kb limit. it's incredibly small for GIFs and like, you'd kinda expect a little more as a VIP member?

even if it was only raised by 50kb it'd make a big difference.

[Recursion]

100kb should be more than enough. Imagine you have 10 posts on a page, that 100kb then turns into 1MB, which is actually a relatively large web page already

From a technical stand point, bad idea.

[Jurv]

I think this is a really nice suggestion, there has been a quite a lot of times where the file I want to use has been too large for the forum.

I'm not sure if this would cause any problems? but yeah, it would be nice if it was raised a little. :)

[beth]

idk really know how tech works, but plenty of our competitors (i won't name names but i think you can guess a few of them) allow much bigger avatars and they don't seem to have any problems with pages loading or whatev.

[xxMATTGxx]

idk really know how tech works, but plenty of our competitors (i won't name names but i think you can guess a few of them) allow much bigger avatars and they don't seem to have any problems with pages loading or whatev.

What do these other lovely sites have them set to?

[beth]

i don't have accounts on the others because well haha yeah, but hffm is 150x150 (64kb) as a new user and it gets bigger with VIP etc. and i know the others are bigger you can just tell browsing through.

[Neversoft]

Didn't they already raise it? It used to be 58.6kb or something. Kind of stupid profile pictures have a smaller limit than avatars.

[beth]

idk really i think in terms of avatar/postbit layout and design we're quite lacking behind other forums, but that's just me. i don't really want to get flamed into the ground for not knowing tech but i am just suggesting perhaps itd be NICE.

[Recursion]

Profile pictures fair enough, but avatars, nah.

150kb, 10 posts per page, 1.5MB before you've got all the skin images and content on the page it self. I cba to find out the size of pages at the moment, but it's big enough.

[beth]

frankly the pages don't load half the time anyway so i'd rather when they finally did load they looked prettier.

[Jurv]

I've not got a clue about any of the technical issues that might come due to this, but is it really that bad to raise it a little? surely it'll be nicer for the VIP members.

[Recursion]

Put it this way, the first page of this thread is only 114kB currently.

[iLogan]

Think it would be a gr8 idea

[Mr-Trainor]

I don't really think this is entirely nessecary, it seems to be set at a fair amount already :).

[Chris]

I'll agree with Tom on this one. It would slow down loading times quite a lot and isn't worth it imo!

[beth]

WELL yr all rubbish anyway so it doesn't even MATTER.

sulks.

[Eoin247]

Personally i wouldn't use the higher limit. And as Recursion said, if it's raised, then on a thread page it could add up to a very large amount. If it's gona make pages load slower then i don't agree with this.

[Chippiewill]

For comparison the signature limit is 400kb, changing the avatar limit to 150 will have a minute performance difference. It only has to load it once per page and normally you end up with just a few different people posting in a page. I run on forty posts per page and I see no latency issues even with "4x" the avatars. Not to mention browser caching etc.

We're not on dial up anymore people. The only way to fill up all that 150kb is with a GIF and if you've got any sensible browser it'll finish loading that last.

[beth]

For comparison the signature limit is 400kb, changing the avatar limit to 150 will have a minute performance difference. It only has to load it once per page and normally you end up with just a few different people posting in a page. I run on forty posts per page and I see no latency issues even with "4x" the avatars. Not to mention browser caching etc.

We're not on dial up anymore people. The only way to fill up all that 150kb is with a GIF and if you've got any sensible browser it'll finish loading that last.

yeah what he said!!!!!!!!

[Jurv]

I'm sure it wouldn't be as much as an issue if it was only available to people with VIP? or whatever.

It would just be nice to have it raised a little for people who want to use those larger files, it would also be another reason to want to enter competitions for VIP. :P

[FlyingJesus]

idk really i think in terms of avatar/postbit layout and design we're quite lacking behind other forums, but that's just me. i don't really want to get flamed into the ground for not knowing tech but i am just suggesting perhaps itd be NICE.

GOD YOU ARE SUCH A STUPID *removed*
But yeah even on my machinery which is hardly top of the range I'm able to load a few small gifs without problem, and it's not like most of us use animated avs anyway because they're totes gonky so it would be very rare pages that have all 10/20/40/500 posts loading separate pictures at 150kb apiece.Also I do love how much LIFE the animation brings to Bethie's current av haha why even bother 4real


Edited by Catzsy (Forum Super Moderator): Please do not avoid the filter

[beth]

GOD YOU ARE SUCH A STUPID *Removed*

But yeah even on my machinery which is hardly top of the range I'm able to load a few small gifs without problem, and it's not like most of us use animated avs anyway because they're totes gonky so it would be very rare pages that have all 10/20/40/500 posts loading separate pictures at 150kb apiece.Also I do love how much LIFE the animation brings to Bethie's current av haha why even bother 4real

shut up mat horne is beautiful.

Edited by Catzsy (Forum Super Moderator): Please stay on topic thanks :)

[Recursion]

For comparison the signature limit is 400kb, changing the avatar limit to 150 will have a minute performance difference. It only has to load it once per page and normally you end up with just a few different people posting in a page. I run on forty posts per page and I see no latency issues even with "4x" the avatars. Not to mention browser caching etc.

We're not on dial up anymore people. The only way to fill up all that 150kb is with a GIF and if you've got any sensible browser it'll finish loading that last.

More than raw connection speed comes into play here.

Browser engines will load the page slower generally, more connection requests have to be made to the webserver the more content that is on a page (not like it would be anymore than it is now, hey ho, but it puts more strain on both the browser and the (already unreliable) server anyway) etc.

You should also remember, a fair number of smart phone users (me included) prefer using a full "Desktop" style on their phone whilst browsing, this would slow page loading to a crawl because of connection speed and RAM limitations on these devices.

If you're using more than 100kb in a GIF, it's either far too big or too long to be an avatar anyway, who around here sits all day watching GIF signatures/avatars? I know I don't. I see one frame before moving on.

[beth]

i don't choose my avatar because yr gonna watch it, i choose it because frankly sometimes i need a distraction from dreadful posts and watching mat horne move makes me excited inside.

[HotelUser]

More than raw connection speed comes into play here.

Browser engines will load the page slower generally, more connection requests have to be made to the webserver the more content that is on a page (not like it would be anymore than it is now, hey ho, but it puts more strain on both the browser and the (already unreliable) server anyway) etc.

You should also remember, a fair number of smart phone users (me included) prefer using a full "Desktop" style on their phone whilst browsing, this would slow page loading to a crawl because of connection speed and RAM limitations on these devices.

If you're using more than 100kb in a GIF, it's either far too big or too long to be an avatar anyway, who around here sits all day watching GIF signatures/avatars? I know I don't. I see one frame before moving on.

RAM limitations would be irrelevant here because most mobile devices, infact, all mobile devices you would even attempt to render the desktop skins on would have a decent chunk of ram.

In terms of how much desktop browsing would slow down, it wouldn't. Caching would take care of that, and the difference in sizes would be so minuscule it would be irrelevant.

In terms of mobile browsing I do think Tom and a few others here have a good point in saying things would be slowed down. Mobile devices aren't as greedy when it comes to caching images for one, and mobile data transfer speeds aren't that great, so it would likely make loading pages for mobile users slower.

[Grig]

It seems like a plausible idea as Habbox's does seem lower than other sites. However, I would be very cautious and not jeopardize the speed of the forum for this. When I load pages full of images with them off my mobile it's a nightmare, so not sure- on the fence really.

[Sharon]

no shut up focus on the actual problem PROFILE PICTURE LIMITS omg was tryna update mine but the limit was so small u g h

[beth]

profile picture who cares about that ****.

[Rixion]

I agree with this idea, if it causes a page to take longer to load then use the obvious option and change the setting of how many posts you want on a page to a lower amount your computer can handle.