Avatar KB Limit???

joro

macrumors 68020
Original poster
Jun 11, 2009
2,358
36
Virginia
It's getting very frustrating to have to resize avatars or compress them to the point of oblivion because of the restrictions on avatars. I understand the 75x75px limit but why is the file size limit so low? If possible, could we raise it to something decent perhaps 50kb + because I know that increase won't put a substantial load on the server especially given the number of people around here who have avatars.

Thanks for the consideration!
 

GoCubsGo

macrumors Nehalem
Feb 19, 2005
35,743
141
^ rude. :cool:

It'd be nice to increase it ever so slightly but with a member base this large maybe it is a load issue.
 

GoCubsGo

macrumors Nehalem
Feb 19, 2005
35,743
141
MacDawg already answered, what more do you need?!

I kid I kid!!

It'd be nice to see if this could happen but so far things have been fine. The only c-block on my avatar was one that was probably not ok on this site. :D
 

joro

macrumors 68020
Original poster
Jun 11, 2009
2,358
36
Virginia
And you know this how?
Because I've run numerous vBulletin & SQL-backed forums and increasing the limit doesn't do a whole bunch to bandwidth, especially given the relatively small percentage of users here who have avatars (relative to the entire membership base)
 

angelwatt

Moderator emeritus
Aug 16, 2005
7,842
7
USA
Because I've run numerous vBulletin & SQL-backed forums and increasing the limit doesn't do a whole bunch to bandwidth, especially given the relatively small percentage of users here who have avatars (relative to the entire membership base)
I'm not necessarily disagreeing, but did those sites have MR page view numbers? MR is very popular and its page loads are huge (compared to most forum sites), so even a couple KB here and there can add up quickly. It's the same reason Google uses such simplified code in their home page.
 

joro

macrumors 68020
Original poster
Jun 11, 2009
2,358
36
Virginia
I'm not necessarily disagreeing, but did those sites have MR page view numbers? MR is very popular and its page loads are huge (compared to most forum sites), so even a couple KB here and there can add up quickly. It's the same reason Google uses such simplified code in their home page.
Even with a large amount of page loads, bandwidth shouldn’t be an issue for a relatively minor increase to maybe around 50 - 60kb. I’ll concede it will increase bandwidth overall; however, if the servers at MacRumors can’t handle such a minor increase it’s probably a good indication they need more horsepower behind the forums (something which may be true given the recent slowness & outages that have been reported in this forum over the past few months).

It’s worth pointing out again that we aren’t talking about adding 25 – 30 kb for 417,000 users. We are talking about a likely small fraction of that which doesn’t add up to nearly as much as you may think. Maybe Dr. Q or someone could confirm the number of users who are avatar eligible and/or using avatars??

Maybe Dr. Q or someone could confirm the number of users who are avatar eligible and/or using avatars??
If you check the memberlist and do an advanced search for users who have over 500 posts (the number required to "qualify" for an avatar), it only comes up to 2,813 members – some of which don’t even have avatars uploaded. So if you take all those members and multiply by 30kb, it comes to 10.3mb which is smaller than many full-sized photos

Plus when you figure that after the initial load these images become cached, the real load on the serve would be negligent after the first few days.
 

dejo

Moderator
Staff member
Sep 2, 2004
15,725
447
The Centennial State
Because I've run numerous vBulletin & SQL-backed forums and increasing the limit doesn't do a whole bunch to bandwidth, especially given the relatively small percentage of users here who have avatars (relative to the entire membership base)
I don't think you can extrapolate your personal experience to claim you know how it will affect MacRumors. But I'll leave it to the site owner and admins to provide the best insight. If they respond, you'll have your answer. If they don't, you'll also know (i.e. they probably aren't going to increase it).
 

GGJstudios

macrumors Westmere
May 16, 2008
44,360
701
I'm actually surprised how few members are eligible for avatars compared to the whole. If somebody had asked I probably would've guessed 25%! :eek:
Just over 2,800 members, or only .78%! If you count only those who have posted in the last year, it's about 2,500, or about 2.2%. That's a tiny percentage of members. Personally, I think the current avatar allowance is fine. I'm glad MR isn't cluttered with outlandish avatars and signatures, that make other forums so difficult to read!
 

dernhelm

macrumors 68000
May 20, 2002
1,634
104
middle earth
Just over 2,800 members, or only .78%! If you count only those who have posted in the last year, it's about 2,500, or about 2.2%. That's a tiny percentage of members. Personally, I think the current avatar allowance is fine. I'm glad MR isn't cluttered with outlandish avatars and signatures, that make other forums so difficult to read!
But the percentage of posts by people with avatars is much higher. If you think about it, that's why they have avatars in the first place.

Myself, I usually block them - especially when I'm at work. There are many that are very distracting - others that I felt were a little lewd. Better just to turn them off altogether.
 

MacDawg

macrumors Core
Mar 20, 2004
19,708
4,274
"Between the Hedges"
Even with a large amount of page loads, bandwidth shouldn’t be an issue for a relatively minor increase to maybe around 50 - 60kb. I’ll concede it will increase bandwidth overall; however, if the servers at MacRumors can’t handle such a minor increase it’s probably a good indication they need more horsepower behind the forums (something which may be true given the recent slowness & outages that have been reported in this forum over the past few months).
Actually, MR added new servers in Februrary to address several issues
 

rdowns

macrumors Penryn
Jul 11, 2003
27,345
12,408
I'm actually surprised how few members are eligible for avatars compared to the whole. If somebody had asked I probably would've guessed 25%! :eek:

Kind of alarming from a business perspective. Why don't people stick around?
 

MacDawg

macrumors Core
Mar 20, 2004
19,708
4,274
"Between the Hedges"
Kind of alarming from a business perspective. Why don't people stick around?
Many join for a specific question and when it is answered, they leave
Others lurk but don't really feel comfortable posting
Some don't feel they have enough expertise to contribute anything that isn't being already said

Some are trolls who grew tired of having their fun

And some posters are so quick to answer everything, others don't get a chance to... (raises hand, guilty)
 

stridemat

Moderator
Staff member
Apr 2, 2008
10,978
589
UK
Kind of alarming from a business perspective. Why don't people stick around?
484 people with 'tars have posted in the last year. That is not that many considering the size of the forums. Seems we are a dying breed.
 

GGJstudios

macrumors Westmere
May 16, 2008
44,360
701
484 people with 'tars have posted in the last year. That is not that many considering the size of the forums. Seems we are a dying breed.
Where do you get that number? Are you counting only those with avatars, or only those qualified for avatars? If I search for all the members with 500 posts or more, whose last post is in the last year, I get a different number:
Picture 2.jpg