Timeline for "Progressive" JPEG: Why do many web sites avoid rendering JPEGs that way? Pros, cons?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 18, 2016 at 17:59 | comment | added | theflowersoftime | 60% of Chrome connections are 2G - Chrome Dev Summit 2016. | |
| Oct 20, 2015 at 16:06 | history | edited | Fiasco Labs | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Added note for where it's still applicable
|
| Oct 20, 2015 at 15:45 | comment | added | ClearCrescendo | Yes, it's less which region of the world these days then if you are on 2G or 3G. Just had a user from Barundi load a page that is 3-8s globally from a wired desktop complete in 115s from a 2G mobile connection. It can still be a slow world on mobile. | |
| Oct 21, 2014 at 12:17 | comment | added | Bhavesh G | But still progressive rendering shouldn't be avoided. | |
| Sep 11, 2014 at 7:41 | comment | added | Sun | Progressive JPEG is also good for island countries where bandwidth is limited and latency is high. | |
| Feb 12, 2013 at 10:50 | comment | added | Baumr | You're neglecting mobile 3G connections — those can be slow; it will depend if people on those visit your site, but the market and usage is really growing in general | |
| Sep 10, 2011 at 19:17 | history | answered | Fiasco Labs | CC BY-SA 3.0 |