gif vs png

[Jon Awbrey]

o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o

could you or michael send us or point us to samples
of each format, so we can compare, and assess whether
we have one of "all major browsers" -- i myself have
avoided updating my netscape due to many bugs and
other bad features of the new ones.  thanks, jon.

N. J. A. Sloane wrote:
> 
> Michael Somos, who has made many valuable updates to the
> OEIS over a period of many years, has written to recommend
> switching to png instead of gif format for illustrations.
> How do seqfans feel about this? In particular, do people
> generally have access to png readers on their computers?
> Here is what Michael says:
> 
> I quote:
> I was just looking at "a1523.gif" (about which more later) and
> wondered why you have not switched over to PNG format. There is a
> nice GPL program 'gif2png' which will do it automatically and easily.
> Do a 'google.com' search for that name to find out why it is a good
> idea to switch to PNG. There are many advantages. For example :
> 
> feynman:/tmp/local> gif2png a1523.gif
> gif2png: 248 unused colors; convert with -O to remove
> feynman:/tmp/local> ls -l a1523*
> -rw-r--r--    1 somos    somos        9011 Jun  4 23:31 a1523.gif
> -rw-r--r--    1 somos    somos        2019 Jun  4 23:45 a1523.png
> 
> The converted file is much smaller in this case. Usually the size is
> more comparable but dramatic gains can be achieved. All major browsers
> now support PNG. It is great for the kind of illustrations that you
> want for EIS.
> (end of quote)
> 
> What do people think?  Please reply directly to me
> 
> Neil
>
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o