4 ms·
Traditional compression research usually prioritized compression ratio, so more images would fit on your floppy disks and were faster to download over 28.8k mod
by superjan 5y ago
Traditional compression research usually prioritized compression ratio, so more images would fit on your floppy disks and were faster to download over 28.8k modems. It usually means increased complexity.
Png has it’s own story as it’s #1 design goal was to avoid techniques that were patented at the time. So they combined a simple set of prepasses with zip/gzip compression. There were better techniques known at the time, but the idea was that combining simple, and known patent-free solutions was the safest way to achieve a free format.
- BlueTemplar 5y agoThe most important is probably the difference between lossy and lossless compression... (The GP-mentioned Bink is lossy ! Then he also for some reason uses a picture tending towards photo realistic which does NOT play well with lossless !)
- superjan 5y agoYeah there’s a difference in techniques used for lossy vs lossless. But my point was that in compression research, runtime performance was much less important than compression performance, that was no different for lossy compression.
- jijji 5y agospeaking of runtime performance if you look at lzma for instance it's horrible on runtime performance but it produces some of the best compression ratio of all of them
- account42 5y agolzma usually decompresses significantly faster than bzip2, which is what it mostly replaced in e.g. package distribution. It also decompresses fast enough that for slow enough connections download + decompression is faster than deflate. Compression is slow though, yes.