Why is Squoosh not good for a real website workflow?

Squoosh is great for manual image compression, but it’s not ideal for a real website workflow because it’s mostly a single-file, browser-based tool rather than a production pipeline.

Main reasons:

• Manual and slow at scale
  You have to open images one by one and tune settings yourself. That’s fine for a few assets, but not for dozens or hundreds.

• Not automated
  Real workflows usually need batch processing, scripts, CI/CD integration, or build-tool support. Squoosh isn’t designed as an automation-first solution.

• No easy repeatability
  It’s harder to guarantee consistent output across a team or over time compared with a scripted pipeline using tools like Sharp, ImageMagick, or build plugins.

• Not integrated into deployment
  Website workflows often need image optimization as part of the build process or asset pipeline. Squoosh is separate from that flow.

• Limited for responsive/image variants workflows
  Real sites often need multiple sizes, formats, and densities (srcset, AVIF/WebP fallbacks, etc.). Squoosh can help generate them, but it doesn’t manage that end-to-end.

• Human error risk
  Because settings are chosen manually, different team members may produce inconsistent results.

Best use case:

• Quickly testing compression settings
• Optimizing a few important images by hand
• Learning how different codecs affect quality and size

Better for production workflows:

• Sharp
• imagemin
• Build tool plugins
• Server-side or CI-based optimization pipelines

If you want, I can also explain when Squoosh is perfectly fine vs when it becomes a bottleneck.