The gzipping does on the bulk of user agents pretty drastically reduce the
bandwidth consumed for non-thumbnail resources.

To follow up on our face-to-face discussions, would it be possible to do
both? That is:

1. Always pare down the thumbnail file size. Thus, cut down initial page
footprint for everyone without sacrificing thumbnails altogether (i.e.,
without requiring the user to have to tap on a "click to view" link) on
low-JS devices.
2. If the user is on a non-zero-rated network and has higher-JS support,
trigger the image retrieval for the more bandwidth intensive image when the
user nears the thumbnail. Because step #1 saves bandwidth, the impact of #2
on bandwidth consumption is in effect minimized.


-Adam


On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 5:01 PM, Jon Robson <[email protected]> wrote:

> I'd rather we didn't serve poor quality images to all our users. This is a
> poorer user experience in my opinion. if I understand correctly this change
> was more to encourage more providers to join zero by providing an incentive
> of Zero users using less data. I'm still not convinced there is a huge
> benefit to the user themselves when you consider gzipping etc. Have you
> benchmarked and documented how this change effects load time? Pulling in
> Ori and Aaron since they should have expertise in this area.
>
> A lot of browsers these days allow you to turn off images altogether and I
> think if a user you'd rather do this then receive poorer quality images. To
> me it's a binary switch - no images or images... On retina displays we
> actually go the opposite direction and pull in better quality images. I
> would hazard a guess that the issue here is the number of http requests
> rather than the size of the images.
>
> I think if we wanted to invest any time in this sort of thing we should
> explore deferring the load of images until they are visible (we dabbled
> with this when we explore lazy loading sections) [1]. It would be
> interesting to rewrite any image after the first heading to be a link to
> the image and pull it in via JavaScript when it is scrolled into view. I
> think this would give us more bang for our buck...
>
> On a side notice I notice all images on mobile are missing a cache
> expiration  - is that intended? Also have we considered adding a header
> Cache-Control: public to them?
>
> [1] http://24ways.org/2010/speed-up-your-site-with-delayed-content/
>  On 9 Jun 2014 11:45, "Tomasz Finc" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Thanks Yuri,
>>
>> CC'ing Multimedia team
>>
>> Maryana, this could be something interesting for the Mobile Web team
>> to look at to optimize image delivery.
>>
>> Have you guys done any perf work around images?
>>
>> --tomasz
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 4:10 PM, Yuri Astrakhan <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> > The reduced quality images is now live in production. To see it for
>> > yourself, compare original with low quality images (253KB => 99.9KB, 60%
>> > reduction).
>> >
>> > The quality reduction is triggered by adding "qlow-" in front of the
>> file
>> > name's pixel size.
>> >
>> > Continuing our previous discussion, now we need to figure out how to
>> best
>> > use this feature. As covered before, there are two main approaches:
>> > * JavaScript rewrite - dynamically change <img> tag based on
>> > network/device/user preference conditions. Issues may include multiple
>> > downloads of the same image (if the browser starts the download before
>> JS
>> > runs), parser cache fragmentation.
>> >
>> > * Varnish-based rewrite - varnish decides which image to server under
>> the
>> > same URL. This approach requires Varnish to know everything needed to
>> make a
>> > decision.
>> >
>> > Zero plans to go the first route, but if we make it mobile, or ever site
>> > wide, all the better.
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Mobile-l mailing list
>> > [email protected]
>> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mobile-l
>> >
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Mobile-l mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mobile-l
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mobile-l mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mobile-l
>
>
_______________________________________________
Multimedia mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/multimedia

Reply via email to