skip to main content
10.1145/2940136.2940138acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagescommConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Free Access

Measuring the Quality of Experience of Web users

Published:22 August 2016Publication History

ABSTRACT

Measuring quality of Web users experience (WebQoE) faces the following trade-off. On the one hand, current practice is to resort to metrics, such as the document completion time (onLoad), that are simple to measure though knowingly inaccurate. On the other hand, there are metrics, like Google’s SpeedIndex, that are better correlated with the actual user experience, but are quite complex to evaluate and, as such, relegated to lab experiments. In this paper, we first provide a comprehensive state of the art on the metrics and tools available for WebQoE assessment. We then apply these metrics to a representative dataset (the Alexa top-100 webpages) to better illustrate their similarities, differences, advantages and limitations. We next introduce novel metrics, inspired by Google’s SpeedIndex, that (i) offer significant advantage in terms of computational complexity, (ii) while maintaining a high correlation with the SpeedIndex at the same time. These properties makes our proposed metrics highly relevant and of practical use.

References

  1. 1.http://www.showslow.com.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.Pagespeed insights. https://developers.google.com/speed/docs/insights/rules.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.Yslow ruleset matrix. http://yslow.org/ruleset-matrix/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.Alexa Internet Inc. http://www.alexa.com.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.J. Brutlag, Z. Abrams, and P. Meenan. Above the fold time: Measuring web page performance visually. http://conferences.oreilly.com/velocity/velocity-mar2011/public/schedule/detail/18692.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.M. Butkiewicz, D. Wang, Z. Wu, H. V. Madhyastha, and V. Sekar. Klotski: Reprioritizing web content to improve user experience on mobile devices. In USENIX NSDI, pages 439–453, Oakland, CA, May 2015. USENIX Association. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. 7.Dynatrace. dynatrace. http://dynatrace.com/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.J. Erman, V. Gopalakrishnan, R. Jana, and K. K. Ramakrishnan. Towards a spdy'ier mobile web? In ACM CoNEXT, pages 303–314, December 2013. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. 9.Google Inc. https://sites.google.com/a/webpagetest.org/docs/using-webpagetest/metrics/speed-index.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.Google Inc. https://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.fr/2010/04/using-site-speed-in-web-search-ranking.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.Google Inc. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=muSIzHurn4U .Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.Google Inc. http://webpagetest.org.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.International Telecommunication Union. Subjective testing methodology for web browsing. Technical report, Feb. 2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.M. Varvello, K. Schomp, D. Naylor, J. Blackburn, A. Finamore, and K. Papagiannaki. Is The Web HTTP/2 Yet? In Passive and Active Measurement (PAM), Apr. 2016.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. 15.R. B. Miller. Response time in man-computer conversational transactions. In Proc. AFIPS Fall Joint Computer Conference, pages 267–277. ACM, 1968. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. 16.J. Nielsen. Response times: The 3 important limits. https://www.nngroup.com/articles/response-times-3-important-limits/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.F. Qian, V. Gopalakrishnan, E. Halepovic, S. Sen, and O. Spatscheck. Tm3: Flexible transport-layer multi-pipe multiplexing middlebox without head-of-line blocking. In ACM CoNEXT, December 2015.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. 18.X. S. Wang, A. Balasubramanian, A. Krishnamurthy, and D. Wetherall. How speedy is spdy? In USENIX NSDI, pages 387–399, Seattle, WA, Apr. 2014. USENIX Association. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. 19.X. S. Wang, A. Krishnamurthy, and D. Wetherall. Speeding up web page loads with shandian. In USENIX NSDI, 2016. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. 20.World Wide Web Consortium. https://www.w3.org/TR/2012/REC-navigation-timing-20121217.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Measuring the Quality of Experience of Web users

          Recommendations

          Comments

          Login options

          Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

          Sign in
          • Published in

            cover image ACM Conferences
            Internet-QoE '16: Proceedings of the 2016 workshop on QoE-based Analysis and Management of Data Communication Networks
            August 2016
            65 pages
            ISBN:9781450344258
            DOI:10.1145/2940136

            Copyright © 2016 ACM

            Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

            Publisher

            Association for Computing Machinery

            New York, NY, United States

            Publication History

            • Published: 22 August 2016

            Permissions

            Request permissions about this article.

            Request Permissions

            Check for updates

            Qualifiers

            • research-article

            Acceptance Rates

            Internet-QoE '16 Paper Acceptance Rate10of21submissions,48%Overall Acceptance Rate10of21submissions,48%

          PDF Format

          View or Download as a PDF file.

          PDF

          eReader

          View online with eReader.

          eReader