• Endymion_Mallorn@kbin.melroy.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    24
    ·
    14 hours ago

    Because I’m tired of all this nonsense where just because a thing is a mature technology, it’s considered obsolete. Stop constantly pushing for the next thing. Keep the things that work.

    • GreenKnight23@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 hours ago

      these damn kids will wake up on day and go, “why do you need xpg? jpgxl is just fine!”

      they don’t realize it yet that the only reason why jpeg xl exists is to silently slip that corpo collar around their necks.

      🤷 only time can feed wisdom and cure stupid.

    • cornshark@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      31
      ·
      12 hours ago

      “How dare they invent a more efficient image encoding! Back in my day we had bmp and we liked it!” - grandpa simpson

    • SaraTonin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 hours ago

      Webp is a smaller file size than jpeg for the same image quality in almost all circumstances - so it’s more efficient and quicker to load. It also supports lossless compression, transparency, and animation, none of which jpeg do. And the jpeg gets noticable visual artefacts at a much higher quality than webp does.

      People didn’t adopt it to annoy you. It’s started to replace jpeg for the same reason jpeg started to replace bmp - it’s a better, more efficient format.

      • The_Decryptor@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        4 hours ago

        Webp is a smaller file size than jpeg for the same image quality in almost all circumstances

        For lower quality images sure, for high quality ones JPEG will beat it (WebP, being an old video format, only supports a quarter of the colour resolution than JPEG does, etc.) JPEG is actually so good that it still comes out ahead in a bunch of benchmarks, it’s just it’s now starting to show it’s age technology wise (like WebP, it’s limited to 8bpc in most cases)

        It also doesn’t hurt that Google ranked sites using WebP/AVIF higher than ones that aren’t (via lighthouse).

        Edit: I should clarify, this is the lossy mode. The lossless mode gives better compression than PNG, but is still limited to 8bpc, so can’t store high bit depth, or HDR images, like PNG can.

        Edit 2: s/bpp/bpc/

    • Fifrok@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      12 hours ago

      It’s unreasonable to stop further software development just because there’s a ‘mature’ solution around. Besides, just because a solution is ‘mature’ doesn’t make it good.

      And considering that it seems like you can still use the original, about 30 year old format, doesn’t look like there’s any harm for the folks not needing or able to use the new stuff.