By Alison Diana E-Commerce Times
02/18/04 4:49 AM PT
"The key thing is understanding what it is you're trying to improve," Keynote VP Lloyd Taylor told the E-Commerce Times. "The classic problem is the army's only fighting the last war. Well, the implementers of Web sites are only fixing the last problem. For a long time, people would just throw hardware at things."
BuyDomains is the world's leading marketplace for premium domains with over 800,000 domain names for sale. BuyDomains' domain experts have helped thousands of businesses locate the perfect domain - let us help yours!
Without measurement, organizations that rely on the Internet for all or part of their business cannot identify problem areas, monitor user compliance with service-level agreements or fully understand users' online experience. Keynote Systems has been measuring Web performance since 1997, and in that time it has seen Web sites grow in complexity and value.
The San Mateo, California-based company also has seen its own value grow.
Keynote garnered revenue of US$9.7 million in its first fiscal quarter of 2004,
an increase of 2 percent versus the prior quarter. The company's traditional performance-measurement services continued to stabilize, while its performance-management offerings
grew 23 percent compared with the same quarter in the previous fiscal year, according to
Umang Gupta, Keynote's chairman and CEO.
Furthering its emphasis on management and services, late last year Keynote acquired the Insight service suite from the Xaffire division of MatrixNet Systems. The company immediately began offering that Internet diagnostic service under the name Keynote Network Perspective.
Lloyd Taylor, vice president of technology and operations at Keynote, recently spent some time talking with the E-Commerce Times about the Web performance and management markets, Keynote's work in these areas, and which trends e-business executives
should track in coming months. Taylor, who joined the company in 1999, is the chief architect of Keynote's measurement infrastructure. He also manages Keynote's operations, customer service and business systems group, in addition to spearheading the company's Red Alert division.
E-Commerce Times: How long has Keynote been measuring performance, and how
has this area of focus changed in the past few years?
Lloyd Taylor: Our first measurements were in '97 -- simply the measurement
of the performance of the main page. Initially, it took about 13.5 seconds to download.
Nowadays, it's more like eight-tenths of a second. The next thing was transactions, which
were multistep page views. That added more complexity -- buying a share of stock can take
you through five pages.
Then we started measuring streaming performance as more and more sites used
video and audio, especially as people started selling online. More recently,
we've seen a lot of interest in wireless performance -- accessing the Internet
with a cell phone or a PDA or BlackBerry. We're offering these measurements as well. As with any other media, it starts with the simple, then grows in
complexity.
ECT: And where is the most interest these days?
Lloyd: The most interest is not just in what's happening, but in modeling
and measuring performance to see what the limits are. There's a lot more interest
in testing from the perspective of the end user. If you test 5,000 customers who
happen to be internal, you'll have great performance. Load-testing has to be
done from the outside.
ECT: How are some of the tools or services you're using to provide external
testing evolving?
Lloyd: There is no longer a one-size-fits-all [model] for business. We've added things like measuring each piece in the transaction line so it gives an absolute representation of the user experience. It's for people who want high-fidelity measurements. We have other products that don't measure high fidelity but cost less to run -- that won't interpret Flash, for example, or execute Java.
We can actually replay a user's experience, just like a
TiVo. It's done with a single code change on the home page. Everything is
easy, low-hassle. It's a service model, a portal base and very easy to use.
ECT: And how does the service model compare, price-wise, with purchasing the
software?
Lloyd: If you look at some of the software products, it can cost $1 million
or $2 million to license these things, then you need five or six people in
your company who know how to use these tools. If you're doing load-testing
once a quarter or once a month, it's not worth it. Buying software is
expensive, and keeping it running is even more expensive.
ECT: Is Web performance a hardware issue? A software issue?
Lloyd: It's really neither. It's really people and philosophy. The fastest
Web sites we measure are Web sites like Google and Yahoo. Now why are they
fast? Ultimately, they're fast because the designers have said, "We want to
have the minimal content possible that makes our customers happy." So look
at the Google home page. Would you imagine that a company that has -- whose
book value is what, $20 billion or $30 billion -- would have such a sparse
home page? And yet they very carefully thought about their customer base and
what their customer base wanted. And what they wanted was very fast response.
The speed really has to do with what you're trying to do and who you're trying
to please.
That said, once you've decided whether you're a content-light site or a
content-heavy site, then yes, absolutely, your design of hardware, your design of software, does your site involve databases, [all become factors].
Business should drive technology. One of the interesting outcomes of the
last three years has been a lot of business is now in charge of technology,
whereas five or 10 years before that, technology was driving business. That
was a good thing because it blasted business out of its old way of thinking.
Now what's happening is businesses are saying, "Great, we bought a load of
new stuff. Now let's make it financially sensible."
ECT: Do the various operating systems have any effect on speed or
performance?
Lloyd: I think it goes back to the design and the willingness of the
designer to implement the best tool for what they're trying to do. The
biggest problem you'll see, in my opinion, from the technology side of the
Net, is that a lot of the folks in implementation tend to be technology
bigots. That is, "I will never, ever use Windows," or, "I will never, ever
use Solaris," or, "I will never, ever use Linux." Those are just tools. It's
kind of like saying, "Well, I have to drive a screw, but I'll only use a
hammer." I mean, you can drive screws with hammers, but it's kind of hard on
the screw and it doesn't do a very good job.
Whatever it takes, it should be
a systems approach to thinking about what the business does -- what am I
trying to achieve, what are my metrics? And here's a critical one: How am I
going to measure whether I'm successful or not? That then drives how you
design, implement and measure what you're doing.
An interesting factoid for you: Keynote does a lot of indices now in
measuring a selected basket of Web sites. Without exception, within six
months of Keynote starting to publish a metric on that basket of Web sites,
performance improves by at least 50 percent. In other words, when we start
measuring something it might be 13 seconds, but within six to nine months
it'll be running at six seconds. Why is that? We're finally making visible,
in a comparative way, how well a site performs. People say we're just trying
to get marketing hype. Actually, this really improves things for the
consumer.
Think about the best Web sites you use every day. What is common among them?
You might be someone who likes content, who likes everything right there.
You might be willing to wait a couple of extra seconds. Or you might want
to get your information quickly.
ECT: What are companies doing -- once you've measured their sites -- to improve
their performance?
Lloyd: Again, the key thing is understanding what it is you're trying to
improve. The classic problem is the army's only fighting the last war. Well,
the implementers of Web sites are only fixing the last problem. So for a long
time, people would just throw hardware at things.
Let me just give you a for-instance. I can't name the customer, obviously,
but there's a load test we did for a major customer a couple of years ago, and
they were being told by their outsourced hardware-software-services vendor that
the site was slow and it was going to cost them $2 million to upgrade the hardware
and software. We did a load test, for which we charged about $50,000, and what we
discovered was there was a misconfiguration in one of the software characteristics
of their Web server. With the correct configuration, performance was even better
than they'd wanted. We probably pissed off the hardware-software-services vendor.
But on the other hand, the customer saved $2 million minus $50,000.
So step number one is to figure out what your real problem is. And a
common problem there is if you ask whoever did the implementation, they're
going to be focused on their piece of it. The first thing to do is go to a
third party that has no vested interest in your hardware or your software or
anything, and say, "Do an audit to find out where the problems are." This is a
powerful tool, not only to help that department figure out what has to be
done, but to explain to the CIO what it involves and what improvements it
will create.
ECT: Is it typically a misconfiguration or something like that?
Lloyd: In a lot of cases what you'll see is it was a decision by the content
folks. I remember we were doing the last presidential election. We were measuring
the various Web sites of the candidates, and there was one Web site from -- again,
I won't name names -- which was abysmally slow. The reason for it was they had a
little 1.5-inch by 1.5-inch picture of the candidate, but they hadn't tuned that
picture. It was a 1.5-megabyte picture that was being dynamically downsized to
1.5 inches by the browser. If they'd taken two seconds with Photoshop or
something like that and stripped it down to a 10-KB image, it would have
looked just as good and the Web site would have been really fast. If
you go to the systems administrator and say, "Why is my Web site so
slow?" that person is probably not going to spend a lot of time
looking at the content.
You really need to engage someone who can understand the whole system -- not
just the hardware and software, but the Internet connections, how content works,
those kinds of things.
ECT: Once they've done that, how easy is it to fix the problem?
Lloyd: It needs to be a business process as opposed to just a technology
process. It's very easy to spend tons of money on hardware, software, consulting
services, but almost every time ... money [is] used in less than optimal ways.
For example, if you have a 200-KB main page and you want to double
performance, you have two choices. You can either double the hardware and
the pipes and everything else, or you can figure out how to reduce the main
page to 100 KB. It may be that you decide your customer base really needs that
200 KB page, in which case, it's fine. It's a business decision. Go buy the
hardware. Go buy the bandwidth. Or you can say, "I'd rather outsource the
heavy-bandwidth stuff to a CDM." That may be a good business decision.
Again, it's a systems approach. It's very hard to find people who will help
you at a systems level. It's not something that happens much in any kind of
industry.
[We give clients] a list of things you can do, easily and inexpensively, to
help reach your goal. And then [we] say, "Here's where you'll have to spend
money."
The second part of that is, once you've made the improvements, you have to
have monitoring. If you aren't measuring it, you aren't managing it. It's
like, when you're sick, going to the doctor to get well but then not
watching your weight, watching what you eat, getting a check-up.
Those are the kinds of things we do in our measurement practice -- keep
continual track of how you're performing. A number of customers are using our
measurements for enforcing service-level objectives with their providers.
They make back 10 or 20 times what they spend on us.
ECT: Is the increasing adoption of high-bandwidth access changing Web design
and Web performance?
Lloyd: I think for those that are specifically targeting individual users,
it certainly is leading them to include more content [and] make more streaming
available. There are whole new business opportunities opening up that way --
iTunes, Napster -- but, again, it really depends on who you're targeting. To
what extent is broadband demand driving that, or to what extent is it just a
natural progression? You just keep adding more and more until somebody
screams.
ECT: Is caching having any impact?
Lloyd: Content distribution managers -- CDMs -- are now a pretty mature
industry in their main product. They've been very, very important in areas such
as the antivirus world. Pretty much all the antivirus vendors download and stream
using CDM. They're also very effective in areas where there's a flash crowd possibility.
A flash crowd I define as a sudden interest in a Web site for an unpredictable reason. For example ... September 11th was the first time we saw the public significantly turning to the Internet for their news, so all the news sites were hammered. CNN when September 11th happened was very smart. They very quickly struck their page down from .25 megabyte to about 10 KB, which gave them a 25-fold improvement in throughput.
The next time we saw the same thing was a few months later when Bush was scheduled
to declare war. At 4:00 Eastern time, the Web sites were completely inundated, but
because they were using CDM and because they had their plans in place, the content
got out.
The other thing where it can be really effective is actually personalizing
sites. What you're seeing more and more is the Web site of a large provider
customized for specific regions. That customization's being handled by CDMs
on the fly.
ECT: Will IPv6 alter Web performance at all?
Lloyd: I don't think it's really material. For one thing, it's going to be
transparent to the majority of end users, assuming it ever happens. The difference
between the academic Internet -- how it should work -- and the real Internet -- how
it does work -- is the academic Internet is always focused on what's best, whereas
the real Internet or the commercial Internet is based on what works and what works
well enough.
Whenever you look at a new technology, you have to ask, "Who's going
to benefit from it? Who's going to pay for it?" Well, we're not running out of
IP addresses. The typical corporation only needs 200 or 250 addresses. There's
no motivation that we're going to run out of IP space. The thing I see driving
it will be stopping spam, quite frankly. Anybody using IP version 6 will have
a hard time hiding their identity. In a lot of ways it's a solution in search
of a problem. Now, I may be wrong, but no one has been able to sit down and
explain to me the economic benefits of making the change. And, as interesting
as it is, it needs economic benefit for it to happen.
There is one exception, by the way: cell phones. Cell phones are heavily
implementing IPv6 -- in Japan, anyway. It may actually be the wireless
networks that drive IPv6, and those are all low bandwidth.
ECT: Is there something missing from the area of Web performance?
Lloyd: The big hole really here is on the owner of the Web site. Anybody
who's making money off the Net or keeping people happy off the Net should be
measuring and managing from the outside. A lot of them are not. And you end
up with a situation where you have unhappy customers that you don't know
about.
The second area where people are not paying enough attention, in my opinion,
is the user experience. There are a lot of really badly designed Web sites out
there that are really hard to use. Spending a little bit of money on something
like our WebEffective product to actually see what users are doing and where
they're getting frustrated is probably one of the most underutilized [options]
out there now. We use it on our own site, and it's really stunning. As we view
how people use both our site and our customer portal site, we're amazed that
we've optimized for the wrong things. We do this on a quarterly basis
because customers' needs change.
A lot of the sites that do it well are some of the airline sites, certainly
the travel sites. They've had to pay attention because they compete with
each other on how well designed the sites are. To pick one out of the air,
as a personal example, look at Northwest
Airlines. What you see more and more is one-click stuff going to the main page.
The first generation of performance was: How fast is my site, my main page?
The second generation was: How long does it take a customer to complete
whatever they want to do on my page, what we call transactions? That
included a little bit of usability because if it took 16 pages to buy a
share of stock as opposed to four, the 16-page trading site came up with a
poorer number. So they became more efficient.
I think we're now in the third
generation, which is recognizing that performance is a function not only of
your hardware, your software, your network , but also of what your customer's
trying to do. This generation, in my mind, is optimizing customer performance.
In some ways, it is actually easier to do that than it is to build a more
powerful Web server to optimize your database. Stop getting in your
customer's way.