The few hundred real compressions are a more useful signal than the feature list.
Curious whether users are choosing LightPIX mainly for the no-signup/privacy angle, or because the target-size workflow solves something TinyPNG/Squoosh don't.
Spot on. The actual behavior is where the real insights are.
Privacy gets them through the door (no signup + zero disk storage = instant trust), but the target-size workflow and zero-bloat logic is what keeps them from going back to TinyPNG/Squoosh.
Curious—if you were using it today, which of those two would be your primary dealbreaker?
Target-size workflow would be the bigger dealbreaker for me. Privacy lowers the barrier to trying it, but being able to hit a specific file-size constraint without repeated manual adjustments is the more concrete reason to switch.
Yeah, that matches what I'm seeing. Privacy is the "why I clicked," target-size is the "why I stayed."
The interesting bit: target-size is a workflow problem, not a compression problem. People aren't chasing "smaller" — they're trying to hit a hard constraint (a 100 KB upload cap, a 5 MB email limit) without the trial-and-error of nudging a quality slider and re-exporting. That manual loop is exactly what TinyPNG/Squoosh leave you doing.
So I'm leaning into it — presets for the constraints people actually hit (upload fields, avatar sizes, email limits), and maybe a "fit to X" that also auto-picks the format.
Thanks for pushing on it. Would per-image targets (different sizes in one batch) matter to you, or is one target per batch enough?
I’d be interested in continuing the conversation privately rather than going deeper here. What’s the best email to reach you on?
About
LightPIX is a high-performance, minimalist web utility designed to optimize digital assets without compromising visual integrity. Built with a focus on speed and a "Function-First" user experience, it addresses the commo
5 Comments
The few hundred real compressions are a more useful signal than the feature list.
Curious whether users are choosing LightPIX mainly for the no-signup/privacy angle, or because the target-size workflow solves something TinyPNG/Squoosh don't.
Yeah, that matches what I'm seeing. Privacy is the "why I clicked," target-size is the "why I stayed."
The interesting bit: target-size is a workflow problem, not a compression problem. People aren't chasing "smaller" — they're trying to hit a hard constraint (a 100 KB upload cap, a 5 MB email limit) without the trial-and-error of nudging a quality slider and re-exporting. That manual loop is exactly what TinyPNG/Squoosh leave you doing.
So I'm leaning into it — presets for the constraints people actually hit (upload fields, avatar sizes, email limits), and maybe a "fit to X" that also auto-picks the format.
Thanks for pushing on it. Would per-image targets (different sizes in one batch) matter to you, or is one target per batch enough?
I’d be interested in continuing the conversation privately rather than going deeper here. What’s the best email to reach you on?