It's a good example but the difference doesn't quite have to be as dramatic as the article makes out. Screenshot tools rarely produce optimised PNGs. A quick t

It's a good example but the difference doesn't quite have to be as dramatic as the article makes out. Screenshot tools rarely produce optimised PNGs. A quick test of the image in the article shows that optipng (lossless) can bring the size down to ~570kb or pngquant (lossy) to ~240kb. Zopfil could further compress the images produced by optipng or pngquant, but it's a case of diminishing returns at that point. To be clear the article makes a good comparison but I think it perhaps overstates the case to make a point.