Alternative to vBSEO

sendur said:
If it's gonna be a migrate-to dragonbyte SEO from vbSEO product, i'd buy it at once! I'm pretty concerned about vbseo discontinuing it's product (site with 80k members and 1.5mil posts).......
Click to expand...

Same here! I'm looking forward to reading more about that product.
 
Really glad to see this is in the works. I will definitely be grabbing this as soon as it's available.
I have used vbseo for almost 4 years now and while it does to the job, I feel that it's using way more server resources than it should be.
I have a very large forum and even the slightest improvement on performance is always a huge help.

And I'd like to be able to uninstall this plugin without it completely breaking my site.
 
That's actually an interesting thing to consider; is performance or features more important to you guys?

We've got some pretty awesome features that we want to add, and while some of them may inherently help with performance (such as Persistent SEO Titles that means the system doesn't have to keep converting content titles to its SEO'd formats), some of them almost exclusively help with the actual SEO of your content (such as Content Related Titles).

The decision of what to focus on next is up to Cosmic but I suspect he'd also be interested in hearing what you guys think we should focus on first :)
 
Fillip H. said:
That's actually an interesting thing to consider; is performance or features more important to you guys?

We've got some pretty awesome features that we want to add, and while some of them may inherently help with performance (such as Persistent SEO Titles that means the system doesn't have to keep converting content titles to its SEO'd formats), some of them almost exclusively help with the actual SEO of your content (such as Content Related Titles).

The decision of what to focus on next is up to Cosmic but I suspect he'd also be interested in hearing what you guys think we should focus on first :)
Click to expand...

Just for some insight for you guys, my approach generally leans towards the SEO side.

I'm always trying to strike a balance, but in general I feel it's best to get the most SEO possible (Man, that sentence just looks wrong, even though it's ok...).

Basically I feel like maximizing SEO should be the priority, since performance improvements can be found later, but delaying on SEO improvements is potentially more costly. That being said it's always about tradeoff. If something is going to add a third of a second loading time for a negligible SEO advantage, we'd make it optional at the very least.

Anything with significant performance concerns will be optional wherever possible, basically.
 
avalanch07 Sorry for missing this :(

Yeah, both tags (normal and blog tags) and avatar URLs (if served from the database) can be rewritten :)
 
Is that the only way it will be able to rewrite avatar urls? Because I primarily keep mine out of the database so I can smush them in between backups & updating.
 
I believe so yes, because if they are stored in the file system then they are image files that exist, not PHP files serving dynamic content.
 
Ok now you've got me confused. I save my avatars as files and they turn out at urls like this.
http://www.video-game-chat.com/forum/customavatars/thumbs/avatar3691_1.gif
Fillip H. said:
I believe so yes, because if they are stored in the file system then they are image files that exist, not PHP files serving dynamic content.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what php file you're talking about that would be serving them & making them dynamic, because every test I run on gtmetrix & webpagetest tells me that those avatars are being cached as static files.
 

Attachments

  • avatars.webp
    avatars.webp
    164 KB · Views: 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top