# Smaller than PNG

**URL:** <https://discourse.mozilla.org/t/smaller-than-png/89407>\
**Category:** Developer Tools\
**Created:** [November 26, 2021, 10:35pm UTC](https://discourse.mozilla.org/t/smaller-than-png/89407 "2021-11-26T22:35:20Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![fccm](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex001/user_avatar/discourse.mozilla.org/fccm/32/53227_2.png) [@fccm](https://discourse.mozilla.org/u/fccm)\
**Post date:** [November 26, 2021, 10:35pm UTC](https://discourse.mozilla.org/t/smaller-than-png/89407/1 "2021-11-26T22:35:20Z")

</div>

Hi,  
It seems that webmasters still care about files size for their web  
pages, because they still minify their javascript and other things to  
reduce band width usage.

Today there is a better alternative than PNG for lossless images in  
terms of file size.

A .bmp image compressed with lzma usually gives a smaller file size,  
as you can see with this example:

9,5K — logo.png  
7,2K — logo.bmp.lzma

The lzma lib is a quite small lib, and reading a .bmp images is trivial.

Making Firefox able to read this compressed format would maybe not  
require too much work.

The file extension could be .bmpz or .bmz (following the .svgz).

Best Regards  
Florent Monnier