[Aardwolf]

Am I the only person who is sensitive to JPEG artifacts? Look at this image from the article. Why did they use such low quality JPEG?

http://blogs.windows.com/cfs-file.ashx/__key/communityserver...

[harpastum]

JPEG from article, 18,873 bytes:

http://blogs.windows.com/cfs-file.ashx/__key/communityserver...

PNG grabbed from actual site: 19,764 bytes:

http://f.cl.ly/items/3w3k2O3n0y0v2W0L1p40/lossless.png

About the same size, much better looking.

[kamjam]

That's how you get your 11% performance gains!

[lambda]

Wow. No, you're not the only one. Those are some of the worst compression artifacts I've seen in an actual image that wasn't just a compression demo that I've seen in years.

[0x0]

They probably compressed it on quality level 11%

[adivik2000]

Haha. I was kinda thinking if Kraken.io was the culprit there for a bit. ;)

[ye]

Why did they use JPEG at all? It's a perfect image for PNG.

Pure incompetence.