[yalooze]

At first I assumed Google's reduction was so high because they'd scraped the site on a day when the logo was a doodle. But I just manually checked Google's main logo and was surprised to see a 40% lossless reduction. I would assume they dogfood PageSpeed (or at least use some internal version of it) which does image optimisation automatically for them. So is Kraken just better or is it just an oversight from Google?

[dm2]

There might be a browser support issue that prevents doing it.

The bandwidth and mobile loading might not be an issue because of their massive amount of data-centers to serve content from.

It seems like it to would be easy to test the new image to see if anyone reports any issues, but there might just not be any benefits to reducing the homepage image by 40%. Make sure you consider that the homepage image is being scaled smaller than the actually image is, some optimizers take this into account and will give you a scaled image.

[DanBC]

> but there might just not be any benefits to reducing the homepage image by 40%

There would be advantages to people on limited bandwidth mobile data plans?

I'm gently curious about the amount of CO2 it takes to push that extra 40% through the Internet.

(Off topic: Seeing the Daily Mail on the Alexa list is profoundly depressing.)

[dm2]

CO2 from extra bandwidth? Probably less than a text-message.

According to this "Club Penguins" are a major source of CO2, I'm not sure why. http://visualization.geblogs.com/visualization/co2/#/club_pe...