Why is the google logo split into three images? :o

Discussion in 'Community Discussion' started by Arciel, Aug 26, 2006.

  1. Arciel macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2006
    Location:
    New Zealand
    #1
    I was looking at google today.

    I noticed that the big "Google" image on google.co.nz was infact split into four pictures:

    http://www.google.co.nz/images/hp0.gif
    http://www.google.co.nz/images/hp1.gif
    http://www.google.co.nz/images/hp2.gif
    http://www.google.co.nz/images/hp3.gif

    However, on google.com, the image is not split:

    http://www.google.com/intl/en/images/logo.gif

    I'm sure there's some sort of interesting reason for this, but I have no idea what it might be. Would anyone care to enlighten me as to why the image has been split?

    Thanks! :)
     
  2. cbetta macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2006
    #2
    funny, i thought it was because of the new zealand written under it, but on the netherlands site it is also 1 image with "Nederland" written under it...
     
  3. Kardashian macrumors 68020

    Kardashian

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2005
    Location:
    Britain.
  4. someguy macrumors 68020

    someguy

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2005
    Location:
    Still here.
    #4
    I would guess laziness, but on second thought, wouldn't this make more work? :confused:

    Seems pointless to me.
     
  5. crazycat macrumors 65816

    crazycat

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2005
    #5
    I thought about that some time ago but i have no idea why they do it.
     
  6. beatsme macrumors 65816

    beatsme

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2005
    #6
    3 or 4 smaller pics will load faster than one big pic. It's called "slicing." Helps preserve bandwidth.

    If you have a copy of Adobe ImageReady, you could easily do it yourself.
     
  7. spicyapple macrumors 68000

    spicyapple

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2006
    #7
    But they are all .gifs. Slicing into smaller pics won't make it load faster because each file has to be retrieved from the server, so the more images you have, the longer it takes.
     
  8. crazycat macrumors 65816

    crazycat

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2005
    #8
    My thought exaclly, it should. Splitting a 1mb pic into ten 0.1mb files is still 1mb at the end.
     
  9. Mal macrumors 603

    Mal

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2002
    Location:
    Orlando
    #9
    Two reasons why slicing really does work:

    Computers are able to download multiple pieces simultaneously, so when you split up an image, you can maximize the bandwidth available much more easily. Thus, even if the total image size is the same, the page will likely load faster than if it was a single image that the computer had to download in sequence.

    Also, when you slice up an image, it makes it easier to reduce the number of colors necessary to display that portion of the image, thus reducing your file size (sometimes fairly significantly). Imageready and Fireworks will both do this rather effectively, and it'd be a good idea to learn this process well and stick to it. The smaller your images can be (without ruining the look you want) the faster your page will load and the longer people will stick around.

    jW
     
  10. beatsme macrumors 65816

    beatsme

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2005
    #10
    not necessarily. The number of images is less important than the transmission time per image.

    think of it like this:
    take the cardboard tube that your paper towels are wrapped around. The cardboard tube is your "bandwidth." You can probably just about fit a ping-pong ball through the tube. It'd be a bit tight but it should go through, though it may take a while...heck, you may have to shove it through.

    Now take a handful of marbles, and try to fit them through the tube, one at a time. They'll roll on through with no problem.

    See what I mean?
     
  11. OutThere macrumors 603

    OutThere

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2002
    Location:
    NYC
    #11
    They probably just sliced it for some reason or another at one point...which is really easy to do, and then never bothered changing it back. I mean, as long as it works, right?

    Plus, the NZ google isn't getting nearly as many hits as the rest of the Google pages, so they would be inclined to care less. :p
     
  12. Sedulous macrumors 68000

    Sedulous

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2002
    #12
    Gifs with fewer colors are smaller. So instead of one big .gif with 25 colors where only some colors are used in 5 areas, they have 5 .gifs with 5 colors. Something like that.
     
  13. Arciel thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2006
    Location:
    New Zealand
    #13
    There's one bit, though, that's been sliced so it has a little bit of a green letter, and a little bit of a red letter, and a little bit of a blue letter :eek: So I don't think that's it, although that was my initial reasoning too.


    :eek: I see! Sort of. It sounds a little insane, but it does make sense. Thanks! That's very interesting :eek:
     
  14. beatsme macrumors 65816

    beatsme

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2005
    #14
    no problem :)
     
  15. Killyp macrumors 68040

    Killyp

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2006
    #15
    Basically, the fewer different colours there are in the image, the less variation in colour the image has, reducing the total number of colours...
     
  16. iMeowbot macrumors G3

    iMeowbot

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2003
    #16
    The logo on www.google.nl is sliced like that, and it does appear that Google sliced it to make it a little easier to get the country name next to the g's descender. My guess is that the additional slice to the left is to allow text on the left side, just in case.
     

Share This Page