cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/2207898

Did you ever hear the tragedy of WebP The Efficient? I thought not. It’s not a story the GIF gang would tell you. It’s an image legend.

WebP was a new format of pictures, so efficient and so lightweight, it could use modern compression to influence the web pages to actually load faster…

It had such a knowledge of the user’s needs that it could even keep transparency and animations from dying.

The power of modern computing is a pathway to many abilities some consider to be unnatural.

It became so widespread… The only thing we had to be afraid of, was people insisting on using formats from the 90’s, which eventually, of course, they did.

Unfortunately, we didn’t teach the noobs everything we knew about compression, then the noobs killed the format by converting it to PNG and sharing that.

Ironic. We could save the web from being too slow, but not from the users.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    9011 months ago

    The only problem I have with .webp and .webm is that not that many applications support them and need to be converted first.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      3611 months ago

      This. Many viewers still dont support it for some reason so despite all technical glory, effectively its often mostly a nuisance. Cmp ogg/vorbis and possibly countless other examples. Adoption is everything for web formats.

    • Kichae
      link
      fedilink
      2511 months ago

      No, there’s also the problem that they’re Google developed formats. I think an increasing number of us want to be done with Google as much as possible, and there are good alternatives that aren’t getting the support they need right now to give us that freedom.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        1111 months ago

        I hate Google too, but if they are proper open specification formats and aren’t encumbered by patents, why does it matter that Google created them? Open format is open format regardless of its creator.

        Do these formats have some DRM capability or other nefarious reason to avoid them or is it just because they were created by someone we don’t like?

      • @[email protected]OP
        link
        fedilink
        1011 months ago

        I understand that but we really fucking need to be moving from jpegif. MP3 and MPEG2 were commercial formats too (actually so was jpeg iirc?) and look where they got us. We just really need someone to get the ball rolling to start using newer formats.

        • Gianni R
          link
          fedilink
          211 months ago

          JPEG has always been royalty-free. It just supported arithmetic coding, which at the time was patented. Arithmetic coded JPEGs are exceedingly rare & you’re unlikely to run into any on the Web.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        311 months ago

        That’s like saying that I don’t want to develop using react.js because it was created by Meta.

    • @[email protected]OP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      411 months ago

      Why are so many people using image viewers from 1993? Nothing against nostalgia, but…

    • exu
      link
      fedilink
      English
      311 months ago

      What applications are those?