advertisement
advertisement

This is page 2 of:

Best Buy’s Dead-Last Mobile Performance: Does It Mean Anything?

October 21st, 2010

Is Best Buy’s site appropriate for what its audience wants? It greets customers with a pleasant holding page that declares “The Best Buy app will be done loading your deals in just a second.” It takes more than a second. But for someone who wants to shop at Best Buy, it’s not an excruciating wait. The site is heavy with options, but is that necessarily a bad thing? After all, if the customers aren’t leaving, there doesn’t seem to be a problem.

Matt Poepsel, Gomez’s vice president for performance strategies, said that mobile site performance is generally impacted by two very distinct areas. The more visibly obvious area is the size of the download for the homepage and subsequent pages, usually dictated by the number and size of images and colors.

But an equally impactful factor is the number of connections between the mobile device and the Web servers delivering the content. That’s generally a matter of third parties, such as advertisers (not a typical M-Commerce issue, but it’s there occasionally), Web analytics, rich media services and ratings/reviews companies, Poepsel said.

One problem is that site management often tries to apply lessons learned in E-Commerce to M-Commerce, and that doesn’t always work. Consider that issue with the number of hops between the device and the server. Web browsers have gotten much more sophisticated about such matters, while mobile browsers are still in their infancy. Consider, too, the difference between the latest browsers today and the earliest Mosaic browsers from the mid-1990s.

“Today’s browsers have become highly evolved. Sites can trick [these modern Web] browsers and they can be made to artificially open up more connections as a performance optimization technique,” Poepsel said. “This simply does not work that well in mobile. On the mobile Web, you’re really trying to have a minimal number” of hops between the device and the server.

The question of how large a landing page will be well tolerated is also not an easy one to answer, because it varies from category to category. One question that is the same from the Web to mobile: Is it better to have a quick-loading homepage and to place the slower elements deeper within the site (on the rationale that once on the site and clicking, a visitor is committed and less likely to abandon) or to delay the load but have a more powerful initial image and then have a faster experience?

“It comes down to ‘Pay me now or pay me later,'” Poepsel said. “It’s the difference between Google and Yahoo.”


advertisement

Comments are closed.

Newsletters

StorefrontBacktalk delivers the latest retail technology news & analysis. Join more than 60,000 retail IT leaders who subscribe to our free weekly email. Sign up today!
advertisement

Most Recent Comments

Why Did Gonzales Hackers Like European Cards So Much Better?

I am still unclear about the core point here-- why higher value of European cards. Supply and demand, yes, makes sense. But the fact that the cards were chip and pin (EMV) should make them less valuable because that demonstrably reduces the ability to use them fraudulently. Did the author mean that the chip and pin cards could be used in a country where EMV is not implemented--the US--and this mis-match make it easier to us them since the issuing banks may not have as robust anti-fraud controls as non-EMV banks because they assumed EMV would do the fraud prevention for them Read more...
Two possible reasons that I can think of and have seen in the past - 1) Cards issued by European banks when used online cross border don't usually support AVS checks. So, when a European card is used with a billing address that's in the US, an ecom merchant wouldn't necessarily know that the shipping zip code doesn't match the billing code. 2) Also, in offline chip countries the card determines whether or not a transaction is approved, not the issuer. In my experience, European issuers haven't developed the same checks on authorization requests as US issuers. So, these cards might be more valuable because they are more likely to get approved. Read more...
A smart card slot in terminals doesn't mean there is a reader or that the reader is activated. Then, activated reader or not, the U.S. processors don't have apps certified or ready to load into those terminals to accept and process smart card transactions just yet. Don't get your card(t) before the terminal (horse). Read more...
The marketplace does speak. More fraud capacity translates to higher value for the stolen data. Because nearly 100% of all US transactions are authorized online in real time, we have less fraud regardless of whether the card is Magstripe only or chip and PIn. Hence, $10 prices for US cards vs $25 for the European counterparts. Read more...
@David True. The European cards have both an EMV chip AND a mag stripe. Europeans may generally use the chip for their transactions, but the insecure stripe remains vulnerable to skimming, whether it be from a false front on an ATM or a dishonest waiter with a handheld skimmer. If their stripe is skimmed, the track data can still be cloned and used fraudulently in the United States. If European banks only detect fraud from 9-5 GMT, that might explain why American criminals prefer them over American bank issued cards, who have fraud detection in place 24x7. Read more...

StorefrontBacktalk
Our apologies. Due to legal and security copyright issues, we can't facilitate the printing of Premium Content. If you absolutely need a hard copy, please contact customer service.