steady offload wp-offload, does it work?

The statistics and bandwidth are updated daily, so you won’t see any activity immediately. You can see that it’s working when you examine the URLs of the pictures in your posts. If they come from SteadyOffload.com, everything is OK.

One credit corresponds to one gigabyte of bandwidth. The more credits you buy at once, the cheaper bandwidth you get.

I hope it’s clear now!

Thanks for that bl0fish. So I ‘viewed source’ code and all my images are still being called from my own server. (24hours after signup) I have inputed my filters, as I see correctly. I added https://mydomain.com/ and https://www.mydomain.com/ which should allow only offloading from that domain, right? Anyway, as said, nothing has changed in my source and I see no performace benefits, yet.
I should add that I turned off all site cacheing (iblog cache) and cleared my browser cache also.
Thanks for the clarification on credits.

Any advice??

Thanks

Would you check the value of your $_SERVER[‘SERVER_NAME’] variable? I have doubts that it doesn’t match dickwhittington.org.

Ok, thanks to a fast and helpful response from Steady-Offload support, Ive got this working and here’s how we did it.

On my theme I use custom fields, which seemed to cause a problem with Steady offload. To get around this we used a different method to ‘offload images’ that meant using the wp-offload plugin was NOT necessary and allowed the use of custom fields as well as ordinary image placements.

1- There is no need to install the plugin.
2- On your Steady offload account, go to control panel and then ‘Integration’
3- You will see a one line java script with your unique key in it
4- Copy that line of java script and paste it into the header.php of your theme between the head tags.
5- Now do a search and replace of all your theme files and replace ‘src ‘with ‘srcx’
6- This will now offload all your images to your ‘Steady offload’ account.

I’m still evaluating this system, but one thing is for sure, images DO play a large part in bandwidth, so this maybe a great concept. The downside is that image names are rewritten and will not be any good for SEO purposes

I’ll post back here in time to make an evaluation of how well this improves my page loads, site efficiency and bandwidth.

Thanks to bl0wfish for all your help. This counts for a lot these days!

houseofstrauss, how was your experience with SteadyOffload?

I was considering using them, but unfortunately their requirements make website to have in-valid html markup, as steadyoffload asks to change <img src=""> into <img srcx="">, where “srcx” is not a valid html tag.