Closed varemenos closed 11 years ago
I think the use of progressive JPEGs to improve perceived performance is controversial. I don't think we should include it here, since browserdiet is focused on beginners.
https://github.com/yeoman/yeoman/issues/810 had an all-star cast of experts weighing in. the conclusion is progressive jpeg has enough advantages to outweigh any cons.
it is VERY MUCH recommended over baseline jpg.
this should be included here, yes.
Great discussion there, Paul. I read most posts, and completely agree that size/CPU/memory problems aren't issues.
My main concern (also cited by some people there) is about the user experience. Progressive visual render is better than linear one, from an user perspective? I think this point is controversial and I don't see any studies reinforcing any argument (or maybe I skipped the wrong posts while reading that discussion ;).
What do you think? Most people agree that progressive rendering is better visually? Does users prefer initially blurry images or linear ones?
Does users prefer initially blurry images or linear ones?
Does users prefer initially blurry images or linear ones?
Remember that progressive jpegs take the space that their final result will require, so they don't force other elements to move away, resize etc
@varemenos This isn't a benefit of progressive jpegs. You can specify width/height on all images and avoid reflow.
The main benefit is the one Paul highlighted, that users prefer a progressive visual rendering.
+1 while webp is not widely supported yet, progressive jpeg should be the goto format.
Fixed.
At the image optimization paragraph, you could add a few words about the use of progressive jpeg against baseline jpeg. There are tons of articles out there explaining the issue (this for example).