Bit.ly code: https://bit.ly/3l9tI3w (8 + 7 + 7 = 22 chars)
Ku.ag code: https://ku.ag/t002te0h.y-e (8 + 6 + 12 = 26 chars)
Every string encodes to the same amount of “squares” in a QR code, so I see no reason to use your service.
Ku.ag code: https://ku.ag/t002te0h.y-e (8 + 6 + 12 = 26 chars)
Every string encodes to the same amount of “squares” in a QR code, so I see no reason to use your service.
Actually the size of QR Code doesn't depend only on length of the string but also on charset used.
For instance, the URLs generated at bit.ly are case sensitive, to encode the qr code you have to use "binary" input mode.
For KUAG I'm using "Alphanumeric" input mode, it reduces the size of the QR code I'm generating however I restricted to a smaller subset of character.
I understand it looks like a paradox; but a bit.ly shortened url leads to a bigger QR code than KUAG (even if the string is longer)
See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QR_code#Storage for more details.
Note: the shortened url I display is 'lowered' for esthetical reason.
Edit: I forgot to mention the error-correction. But I don't think it's fair compare with other shorteners if they are not using the same error-correction level.
That's not correct. QR codes have redundant pixels, and you can choose how much redundancy you want.
That said, the default in most generators is the least amount of redundancy.
If you use only numbers you use 3 1/2 bit per character, if you use only numbers, uppercase letters and some limited punctuation it’s 5 1/2 bits per character. Otherwise it’s 8 bits per character but that’s a waste because most of the characters you can then represent can’t be used in a URL.
Oh never mind, they're going to kill the address bar instead. Next they should just introduce an emoji that means "Search for this on Google:"...