WatchMouse monitored a total of 104 sites for performance issues, and many of them were entities that you probably haven’t heard of (Rummble, Sconex, Woophy, etc.). Now, guess which site scored worst? Got a name in mind? Did you think (this article’s title aside) of Facebook?
Facebook has been plagued by privacy problems, questions about its profitability, and accusations of egotism. I can’t recall coming across a complaint about the site’s performance, though, in either my professional or off-the-clock life. Which raises the question of whether the WatchMouse report, which puts Facebook in absolute last place, is a load of hooey.
The answer, such as it is, may be that one never knows. Facebook has surely had an off day or three, and it could have been caught on one of those. Or the testing may have been done from a place in which Facebook’s performance is genuinely weak. The issue is, at least, something for Facebook and other sites to consider.
Sites like Buzznet, Last.fm, and Twitter might want to give it extra thought – WatchMouse identified them, along with Facebook, as some of the poorer performers. Orkut, Xing, and Flickr came out near the top of the pack.
No individual needs to put too much stock in the WatchMouse report, however. What works for you works for you. What doesn’t, doesn’t. With a hat tip to Robert Jacques, I’d simply suggest you adjust the ways in which you spend your time accordingly.
