Why Safari 3 is Great, Part 2
I showed in a previous post that Safari is better than Firefox, on Windows, at handling pictures. Besides managing color profiles, Safari also offers a much better resizing algorithm. The pictures below show one of my photographs resized by Firefox 2 and Safari 3 on Windows. The original picture is 3620 x 2440 pixels large and I created a simple page that resizes this picture to 500 x 337 and 240 x 162 pixels. Move your mouse over each picture to see the difference between the two browsers.
You also look at a side by side comparison. Besides the jaggy edges, you can see banding in the sky, in the top right corner.
P.S: Telling me that the width and height attributes of an img tag are not the best way to resize an image would be pointless and would not make Firefox better on this particular case. I have to admit that I never use them though :)
Hmmm why it doesn’t seem to work ? (the hover effect you’re talking about…)
Because WordPress screwed up the JavaScript and I’m trying to fix that :)
Fixed!
i like the firefox method here; it gives a visual indication that the image is actually larger than shown.
i call personal preference, no clear winner.
Pretty effective way to get a point across. I’d agree on this specific feature (and I do use the width and height attributes from time to time).
I believe that Opera is the only other browser to properly smooth resized images. It’s a pity as the artifacts are so much ugly!
Maybe: about:config images.dither=true
Blurry != better
Asd, jeremiah: Too bad then that Firefox for Mac OS X behaves exactly as Safari when it comes to images resizing. And Asd, this “blur” is what you would usually call antialiasing.
Personally I think you would be better getting onto the Firefox guys with your idea’s on future enhancements. I’m not sure Safari can compete long term or short.
I think Steve is probably right. Safari may be the browser of choice for Mac users but it’s dfficult to imagine anything but a very small minority of Windows users using it, particularly when there are alternatives such as Firefox, Opera, etc.
Nine out of ten day-to-day users of browsers have little interest in which browser they use (provided it comes up to an undefined minimum standard) and will simply go with the status quo.
Hello. This is well-known issue with the Firefox and lots of bugs are being reported. They already solved in some part but not all.
Please take a look at https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=98971#c146
and https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=372227
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=366942
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=372462
I would say that the Mac version of the Firefox can display images better than its Windows version. I guess they use different decoder or resize algorithm.
This is something that has been bothering me with firefox, the rendering can be very different on Windows and Mac OS X. That said I am glad to hear that the Firefox team is working on this issue with images. Thanks for the information.
This is exactly what I expected to find out after reading the title o.us poetry. Thanks for informative article
I Do Not Agree With You Because Safari 3 Does Not Support Other Languages Like Arabic,Iranian And Sometimes Hebrew
http://blog.vlad1.com/2008/03/18/a-little-more-cairo-just-for-you/
Firefox 3.0 has high quality image scaling.
I really enjoy the article.Much thanks again. Want more.