Live data from Hacker News

Squoosh: Make images smaller using best-in-class codecs, right in the browser

squoosh.app

11–20 of 36 posts

Re: Squoosh: Make images smaller using best-in-class codecs, right in the browser

#11

Squoosh does not use best-in-class codecs [1]. Lossless PNG compression is 5-15% worse on average and lossy PNG compression (color quantization) is limited to PNG-8, which is not enough to maintain image quality. Lossy JPEG compression is only tuned for 4:2:0 chroma subsampling and causes blurring of fine details because trellis quantization is guided simply by the variance in DCT domain. [1] https://optimage.app/ben…

It is poor etiquette to not include a disclosure of your relationship to the link provided.

Re: Squoosh: Make images smaller using best-in-class codecs, right in the browser

#13

Squoosh does not use best-in-class codecs [1]. Lossless PNG compression is 5-15% worse on average and lossy PNG compression (color quantization) is limited to PNG-8, which is not enough to maintain image quality. Lossy JPEG compression is only tuned for 4:2:0 chroma subsampling and causes blurring of fine details because trellis quantization is guided simply by the variance in DCT domain. [1] https://optimage.app/ben…

It's marketing hyperbole, no one really believes it's the absolute best-in-class. The idea of this open source app from Google is to demonstrate a real world use case of porting legacy native code to the web via webassembly

Exactly and if you need to quickly optimise some background JPEG to save 400Kb , because the designers / developers haven't optimised the flipping images.

Re: Squoosh: Make images smaller using best-in-class codecs, right in the browser

#14

Squoosh does not use best-in-class codecs [1]. Lossless PNG compression is 5-15% worse on average and lossy PNG compression (color quantization) is limited to PNG-8, which is not enough to maintain image quality. Lossy JPEG compression is only tuned for 4:2:0 chroma subsampling and causes blurring of fine details because trellis quantization is guided simply by the variance in DCT domain. [1] https://optimage.app/ben…

Previous discussion of optimage: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18254507

Re: Squoosh: Make images smaller using best-in-class codecs, right in the browser

#16
post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Try hackintosh it’s great fun if you like OS X

If you are a masochist, it’s for sure fun. If not, you really won’t like your installation constantly breaking, not being updatable without great trouble and just not being able to be relied upon in general. Not to mention this is illegal.

eh... illegal, depends on how you got access to MacOS and on your jurisdiction as well as the reasons for doing it. (Research, for instance.) The other points, I agree with 100%.

Re: Squoosh: Make images smaller using best-in-class codecs, right in the browser

#17
post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given that literally nobody has ever needed, nor will they ever need, to talk about file sizes in millibits , there is no ambiguity involved.

Even though it’s unlikely anyone will think it’s referring to millibits, there’s still a decent chance some will assume Mb (Megabits) due to the lowercase 'b' instead of the intended MB (Megabytes).

game cartridges used to be specced in megabits

Re: Squoosh: Make images smaller using best-in-class codecs, right in the browser

#19
post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Try hackintosh it’s great fun if you like OS X

If you are a masochist, it’s for sure fun. If not, you really won’t like your installation constantly breaking, not being updatable without great trouble and just not being able to be relied upon in general. Not to mention this is illegal.

I strongly agree on the former, but wasn't illegal only for criminal law? This would be a licence violation with a fine from civil law, no?

I'm not is lawyer though, just surprised about the illegal term in this context

Re: Squoosh: Make images smaller using best-in-class codecs, right in the browser

#20
post #19
post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you are a masochist, it’s for sure fun. If not, you really won’t like your installation constantly breaking, not being updatable without great trouble and just not being able to be relied upon in general. Not to mention this is illegal.

I strongly agree on the former, but wasn't illegal only for criminal law? This would be a licence violation with a fine from civil law, no? I'm not is lawyer though, just surprised about the illegal term in this context

No, "illegal" is "unlawful" and also covers civil law (or any other body of law).

The word you're looking for is "criminal".

Post reply on HN