Tools & Wizards About Us
light.ws screenshot

Report Summary

  • 0

    Performance

  • 33

    Accessibility

    Visual factors better than
    that of 18% of websites

  • 75

    Best Practices

    More advanced features
    available than in
    36% of websites

  • 58

    SEO

    Google-friendlier than
    20% of websites

light.ws

light.ws

Page Load Speed

6.8 sec in total

First Response

1 sec

Resources Loaded

5 sec

Page Rendered

768 ms

light.ws screenshot

About Website

Welcome to light.ws homepage info - get ready to check Light best content right away, or after learning these important things about light.ws

Visit light.ws

Key Findings

We analyzed Light.ws page load time and found that the first response time was 1 sec and then it took 5.8 sec to load all DOM resources and completely render a web page. This is a poor result, as 75% of websites can load faster.

Performance Metrics

light.ws performance score

0

Network Requests Diagram

www.lightnotebook.com

1025 ms

bootstrap.home.min.css

494 ms

icons.css

677 ms

font-awesome-ie7.css

678 ms

bootstrap-image-gallery.min.css

686 ms

Our browser made a total of 59 requests to load all elements on the main page. We found that 0% of them (0 request) were addressed to the original Light.ws, 5% (3 requests) were made to Simplesharebuttons.com and 3% (2 requests) were made to Maxcdn.bootstrapcdn.com. The less responsive or slowest element that took the longest time to load (2.1 sec) relates to the external source Lightnotebook.com.

Page Optimization Overview & Recommendations

Page size can be reduced by 730.1 kB (54%)

Content Size

1.4 MB

After Optimization

624.4 kB

  • HTML
  • Images
  • JavaScript
  • CSS

In fact, the total size of Light.ws main page is 1.4 MB. This result falls beyond the top 1M of websites and identifies a large and not optimized web page that may take ages to load. 40% of websites need less resources to load. Javascripts take 649.0 kB which makes up the majority of the site volume.

HTML Optimization

-83%

Potential reduce by 27.5 kB

  • Original 33.4 kB
  • After minification 22.7 kB
  • After compression 5.8 kB

HTML content can be minified and compressed by a website’s server. The most efficient way is to compress content using GZIP which reduces data amount travelling through the network between server and browser. This page needs HTML code to be minified as it can gain 10.7 kB, which is 32% of the original size. It is highly recommended that content of this web page should be compressed using GZIP, as it can save up to 27.5 kB or 83% of the original size.

Image Optimization

-3%

Potential reduce by 10.7 kB

  • Original 383.9 kB
  • After minification 373.2 kB

Image size optimization can help to speed up a website loading time. The chart above shows the difference between the size before and after optimization. Light images are well optimized though.

JavaScript Optimization

-69%

Potential reduce by 445.9 kB

  • Original 649.0 kB
  • After minification 632.0 kB
  • After compression 203.2 kB

It’s better to minify JavaScript in order to improve website performance. The diagram shows the current total size of all JavaScript files against the prospective JavaScript size after its minification and compression. It is highly recommended that all JavaScript files should be compressed and minified as it can save up to 445.9 kB or 69% of the original size.

CSS Optimization

-85%

Potential reduce by 246.0 kB

  • Original 288.2 kB
  • After minification 256.4 kB
  • After compression 42.1 kB

CSS files minification is very important to reduce a web page rendering time. The faster CSS files can load, the earlier a page can be rendered. Light.ws needs all CSS files to be minified and compressed as it can save up to 246.0 kB or 85% of the original size.

Requests Breakdown

Number of requests can be reduced by 35 (64%)

Requests Now

55

After Optimization

20

  • Images
  • JavaScript
  • CSS

The browser has sent 55 CSS, Javascripts, AJAX and image requests in order to completely render the main page of Light. We recommend that multiple CSS and JavaScript files should be merged into one by each type, as it can help reduce assets requests from 24 to 1 for JavaScripts and from 13 to 1 for CSS and as a result speed up the page load time.

Network Requests Diagram

www.lightnotebook.com

www.lightnotebook.com

1025 ms

bootstrap.home.min.css

bootstrap.home.min.css

494 ms

icons.css

icons.css

677 ms

font-awesome-ie7.css

font-awesome-ie7.css

678 ms

bootstrap-image-gallery.min.css

bootstrap-image-gallery.min.css

686 ms

animate.css

animate.css

682 ms

colorbox.css

colorbox.css

686 ms

idangerous.swiper.css

idangerous.swiper.css

712 ms

lineicons.css

lineicons.css

895 ms

home-style.css

home-style.css

896 ms

margins-paddings.css

margins-paddings.css

902 ms

mobile.css

mobile.css

900 ms

dropdown-fix.css

dropdown-fix.css

906 ms

application.js

application.js

927 ms

jquery.1.11.0.min.js

jquery.1.11.0.min.js

1548 ms

jquery-ui.min.js

jquery-ui.min.js

1563 ms

jquery-ui.touch-punch.min.js

jquery-ui.touch-punch.min.js

1128 ms

jquery.cookie.js

jquery.cookie.js

1127 ms

jquery.colorbox-min.js

jquery.colorbox-min.js

1126 ms

pusher.min.js

pusher.min.js

1149 ms

font-awesome.min.css

font-awesome.min.css

28 ms

smoothscroll.js

smoothscroll.js

1343 ms

modernizr.js

modernizr.js

1347 ms

bootstrap.min.js

bootstrap.min.js

1347 ms

jquery.colorbox-min.js

jquery.colorbox-min.js

1357 ms

idangerous.swiper.min.js

idangerous.swiper.min.js

1597 ms

wow.min.js

wow.min.js

1598 ms

app.js

app.js

1597 ms

bootstrap.min.js

bootstrap.min.js

1598 ms

smoothscroll.js

smoothscroll.js

1754 ms

modernizr.js

modernizr.js

1767 ms

idangerous.swiper.min.js

idangerous.swiper.min.js

1799 ms

wow.min.js

wow.min.js

1800 ms

home.app.js

home.app.js

1801 ms

facebook.png

facebook.png

99 ms

google.png

google.png

111 ms

twitter.png

twitter.png

111 ms

app-store.png

app-store.png

236 ms

google-play.png

google-play.png

382 ms

iphone.png

iphone.png

831 ms

android.png

android.png

1053 ms

white-background.jpg

white-background.jpg

620 ms

logo.png

logo.png

403 ms

preloader.gif

preloader.gif

448 ms

why_iphone.png

why_iphone.png

816 ms

school.jpg

school.jpg

1503 ms

work.jpg

work.jpg

1539 ms

business.jpg

business.jpg

1498 ms

family.jpg

family.jpg

2129 ms

sports.jpg

sports.jpg

1268 ms

checkbox-black.png

checkbox-black.png

1304 ms

icon_top.png

icon_top.png

1521 ms

fontawesome-webfont.woff

fontawesome-webfont.woff

20 ms

iframe_api

iframe_api

53 ms

ga.js

ga.js

50 ms

overlay.png

overlay.png

1292 ms

www-widgetapi.js

www-widgetapi.js

21 ms

__utm.gif

__utm.gif

16 ms

1

1

194 ms

Accessibility Review

light.ws accessibility score

33

Accessibility Issues

Names and labels

These are opportunities to improve the semantics of the controls in your application. This may enhance the experience for users of assistive technology, like a screen reader.

Impact

Issue

High

<frame> or <iframe> elements do not have a title

Internationalization and localization

These are opportunities to improve the interpretation of your content by users in different locales.

Impact

Issue

High

<html> element does not have a [lang] attribute

Best Practices

light.ws best practices score

75

Areas of Improvement

Trust and Safety

Impact

Issue

High

Does not use HTTPS

Low

Ensure CSP is effective against XSS attacks

General

Impact

Issue

High

Browser errors were logged to the console

SEO Factors

light.ws SEO score

58

Search Engine Optimization Advices

Language and Encoding

  • Language Detected

    EN

  • Language Claimed

    N/A

  • Encoding

    UTF-8

Language claimed in HTML meta tag should match the language actually used on the web page. Otherwise Light.ws can be misinterpreted by Google and other search engines. Our service has detected that English is used on the page, and neither this language nor any other was claimed in <html> or <meta> tags. Our system also found out that Light.ws main page’s claimed encoding is utf-8. Use of this encoding format is the best practice as the main page visitors from all over the world won’t have any issues with symbol transcription.

Social Sharing Optimization

light.ws

Open Graph description is not detected on the main page of Light. Lack of Open Graph description can be counter-productive for their social media presence, as such a description allows converting a website homepage (or other pages) into good-looking, rich and well-structured posts, when it is being shared on Facebook and other social media. For example, adding the following code snippet into HTML <head> tag will help to represent this web page correctly in social networks: