4 ms·
This took me a total of 5 minutes: http://static.haldean.org/why-is-the-internet-slow.html http://static.haldean.org/why-is-the-internet-slow.html The page is
by haldean 9y ago
This took me a total of 5 minutes: http://static.haldean.org/why-is-the-internet-slow.html http://static.haldean.org/why-is-the-internet-slow.html
The page is 2.3kB on the wire, and the single other request it makes (for the image) adds another 70kB. Taken together, this is a two-order-of-magnitude decrease in page size, with exactly the same content.
Every byte is sacred! This webpage infuriates me.
- zepolen 9y agoYour 68kb png infuriates me when it can be compressed to 28kb.
- haldean 9y agoWhile keeping it a PNG? I hit that thing with pngcrush and scaled it to half the size of the original article: what's your magic to get it down to 28k?
- slf 9y agoYou can use lossy PNG compression (palletizing) since it's 'just' a graph. There are seven different colors in it that all alias to white. Convert it to a 32 color 8-bit version and it looks identical. Then use ImageOptim (or like) to compress it down to less than 16 KiB.
- haldean 9y agoNeat, it's 12kB now: convert -colors 16 Ilker_fast.png Ilker_tiny.png pngcrush Ilker_tiny.png Ilker_out.png Total page weight is now 15kB, 0.2% the size of the original page. Incidentally, that ratio is about the same as the ratio between the original page and the entirety of the game Overwatch.
- ChoGGi 9y agoYou can shave 1kB off that png with advpng -4 -z -i 15 http://www.advancemame.it/doc-advpng.html http://www.advancemame.it/doc-advpng.html
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- charrondev 9y agoI'll just leave these here. http://motherfuckingwebsite.com http://motherfuckingwebsite.com http://bettermotherfuckingwebsite.com http://bettermotherfuckingwebsite.com
- pagnol 9y agoThanks for the links, but why do people downvote your comment?
- linkregister 9y agoSomeone posts these links every time the discussion comes up on HN. The down voters have likely forgotten that there are many new people who haven't seen these websites yet. It looks like the down votes have been reversed. In the spirit of these repeated posts, I'll repeat the typical critique. "The white background is harsh on eyes, and there is nothing wrong with images and color to help improve aesthetics."
- mixedCase 9y agoWeird to see people actually have an issue with the background, specially when "better" explicitly mentions this: "I would've even made this site's background a nice #EEEEEE if I wasn't so focused on keeping declarations to a lean 7 fucking lines."