Ryan

My feedback

  1. 1 vote
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)

    Hey Ryan, thanks for the suggestion.
    We have are currently planning to switch the Benchmark check over to using our RBC platform under the covers to perform the tests. This makes many more metrics available to Benchmark check, include DomContentLoad, Fully Loaded, as well as future things we add to RBC, such as SpeedIndex.

    We email you to better understand what you mean by 3PC Javascript “calls” (the requests to 3rd party urls? The number of function calls 3PC JS makes, etc)

    Ryan shared this idea  · 
  2. 14 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)

    100% agree. We have big plans for the Benchmark checks, and the first step is to allow both User-Agent and ViewPort settings when configuring

    Ryan supported this idea  · 
  3. 45 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)

    We are reviewing use cases for our custom reports now, and I can how more specific time granularity would be helpful, especially when you want to focus on, or exclude, a specific time period of trouble.

    Ryan commented  · 

    We are no longer seeing the delay with reporting. Reports are now regularly available the next day. I would now like to see reports available the same day with any data collected so far that day which might still need to be a delay of a couple hours depending on processing time.

    Ryan supported this idea  · 
    Ryan commented  · 

    Yes, in addition to months, weeks, or days, having the ability to compare by hour would be very helpful.

    Also, being able to have the reports be updated hourly is needed. Currently we're experiencing a delay the last 3 weeks where reporting is getting backup up which doesn't allow us to view data from Sunday and Monday till Wednesday or Thursday.

  4. 8 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    Ryan supported this idea  · 
  5. 17 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)

    To be clear, right now all of Rigor’s Real Browser Checks run under a real browser, not an emulated one. We are using FireFox 45 ESR. When you select a different User-Agent, we change that UA string or view port, but its always a real browser.

    Upgrading to this new version of FF meant we had to completely rewrite all our plugins that take measurements. Luckily these new plugins are more universal, so adding additional real browsers like Chrome is easier.

    We are now looking at how to add additional browsers

    Ryan supported this idea  · 
    Ryan commented  · 

    yes, real browsers and not just emulators

  6. 18 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)

    Great idea. And I like the idea of separating “This check run failed” vs “This check run didn’t met our criteria” as some kind of warning instead. Looking into how to implement this

    Ryan supported this idea  · 

Feedback and Knowledge Base