Faster Images using HTTP2 and Progressive JPEGs

Re:Faster Images using HTTP2 and Progressive JPEGs by the8472 on Wednesday December 28, 2016 @05:28AM (#13269671)

I never liked progressive images. Just loading vertically is far less tantalizing than having to check the pixelation to see whether you're really looking at the final product.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Faster Images using HTTP2 and Progressive JPEGs by eknkc on Wednesday December 28, 2016 @07:36AM (#13270104)

I'd like progressive with a small progress bar overlay on images. But as they are presented today, I agree.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Faster Images using HTTP2 and Progressive JPEGs by angry-hacker on Wednesday December 28, 2016 @06:58AM (#13269964)

Mee too, but choosing between page jumping and your scenario, I take pixelerated. Often I even don't look at those images, all I look is page jumping.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Faster Images using HTTP2 and Progressive JPEGs by the8472 on Wednesday December 28, 2016 @07:04AM (#13269986)

Why would the page jump? The rectangular size of the image is encoded in the header either way. The layout engine will already reserve the necessary space as soon as the first few bytes of the image are loaded, progressive or not.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Faster Images using HTTP2 and Progressive JPEGs by angry-hacker on Wednesday December 28, 2016 @09:10AM (#13270525)

It's possible I was mistaken. Thank you for pointing it out, I need to research it a bit more.

[ Parent | on HN ]