Local Image Caching solution for Android:square Picasso vs Universal Image Loader

Local Image Caching solution for Android:square Picasso vs Universal Image Loader

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/19995007/ Local-image-caching-solution-for-android-square-picasso-vs-universal-image-load Picture Cache Library Usage Comparison

Question

I need async image loading and caching in Android. Anyone knows about these and libraries? I was going to the use of Picasso, but I found Universal Image Loader are more popular on Github. A Summary of pros and cons would be great. (All my images be on disk locally, so I don ' t need networking, I don ' t think volley is a fit)

Answers

If you read this post on g+ by Koush you'll get clear solutions for your confusions, I has put the summary of that, in That Android-universal-image-loader was the winner for your requirement!

• Picasso have the nicest image API if you are using network!
• Urlimageviewhelper +androidasync is the fastest. Playing with these and other great libraries has really highlighted, the image API is quite dated, however.
• Volley is slick; I really enjoy their pluggable backend transports,and may end up dropping androidasync in there. The request Priorityand cancellation management is great (if you are using network)
• Android-universal-image-loader is the most popular one out therecurrently. Highly customizable.

This project aims to provide a reusable instrument for asynchronous image loading, caching and displaying. It is originally based on Fedor Vlasov ' s project and have been vastly refactored and improved since then.

Upcoming changes in new UIL version (1.9.2):

Possibility to the imageloader out of the UI threadnew Disk Cache API (more flexible). New Lrudisccache based on Jake Wharton ' s disklrucache.

Considering all this android-universal-image-loader suites your requirement (Loading the images is on disk locally)!

----------

Koushik Dutta ' s comparison is mostly for speed benchmark. His post was only touched very basic things, and was not specific for local images. I ' d like to share my experiences with Picasso and UIL after I asked the question. Both Picasso and UIL can load local images. I first tried Picasso and is happy, but the later I decided to switch to the UIL for more customization options.

Picasso:

• Picasso ' s fluent interface is nice. But jumping around with "to", "to", "load" you actually don ' t know what's behind the scene. It ' s confusing what's returned.
• Picasso allows you to specify exact target size. It's useful when you had memory pressure or performance issues, you can trade off some image quality for speed.
• Images is cached with a size in its key, it's useful when you display Images with different sizes.
• You can customize the memory cache size. But it disc cache is only for HTTP requests. For local images, if you are about loading speed, it's good to having a thumbnail disk cache so you don't have to read Seve Ral MBs for an image every time. Picasso does not has this mechanism resizing and saving thumbnails on disk.
• Picasso does not expose the access to its cache instance. (You can get a hold for it when you first configure Picasso and keep it around ...).
• Sometimes want to asynchronously read image into a bitmap returned by a listener. Surprisingly Picasso doesn ' t has that. "Fetch ()" Dose not pass the back anything. "Get ()" is for synchronously read, and "load ()" are for asynchronously draw a view.
• Picasso only had a few simple examples on the homepage, and you'll have to read through the unordered Javadoc for advanced Usages.

UIL:

• UIL uses builders for customization. Almost everything can be configured.
• UIL does not allow you to specify the size of you want to load into a view. It uses some rules based on the size of the view. It ' s not as flexible as Picasso. I have no-to-load a lower resolution image to reduce memory footprint. (Edit:this behavior can be easily modified by adding a ImageSize argument in in the source code and bypass the view size Checking
• UIL provides customizable disc cache, you can use this to cache the thumbnails with specified size. But it's not perfect. Here is thedetails. (Edit:if you care about speed and want multiple levels of thumbnail caching, like my case, you can modify the source code , let the disk cache use "Memorykey", and make it also size sensitive)
• UIL By default caches images of different sizes in memory, and it can be turned off in configuration.
• UIL exposes the backing memory and disk cache you can access.
• UIL provides flexible ways can get a bitmap or load to a view.
• UIL is better in documentation. UIL gives the detailed usages on the Github page, and there ' s a linked tutorial.

I suggest starting with Picasso, if you need more control and customization, go for UIL.

Local Image Caching solution for Android:square Picasso vs Universal Image Loader