CloudConvert.com might as well be my fucking home page.

154 points

Webp

Developed by google, for google products.

Not guaranteed to work with google products (looking at you google voice.)

permalink
report
reply
91 points

Guaranteed support will be dropped at random in the future.

permalink
report
parent
reply
26 points

The Google Way.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

Probably because nobody uses it.

The whole “Google will kill it” meme is a self fulfilling prophecy.

Google creates thing.

Everyone thinks Google will kill that thing, so nobody uses it.

Google kills the thing because nobody uses it.

And the cycle continues.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Dunno about “nobody.” Tons of sites use it. Hell, Telegram uses it for stickers exclusively. We use it everywhere on my job’s website

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
141 points
*

You get the exact same quality at around ~25% smaller than other image formats. Unfortunate that it’s not supported by everything, but yeah it’s a better image format practically in that sense.

On the web this saves money when storing at a large scale, and it can have a significant impact on page speed when loading websites on slower connections.

permalink
report
reply
24 points
*

My problem is the way it’s packaged as a link to a website that hosts the jpeg image. Saving, modifying, and using the image file becomes impossible in some workflows. Imagine a future where you get fined for stealing memes. I bet they could make the image file size even smaller without all of that bullshit added in, until then I’m just using an extension to convert to png (which results in loss btw).

permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
-10 points
*

Converting FROM a format to a DIFFERENT FORMAT can cause loss. In this case from one compressed type to another.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

It’s already supported in many more places than it was a couple years ago. It just takes time.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

I’d rather see the savings in the army of Javascript I apparently need today for the ‘modern’ web experience. Image files have gotten lots of love, but hey, here’s a shitty 27 year old language designed for validating form input!

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points

Save a lot more debloating your code. Storage is cheap. Processing power is not.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

There are still places where bandwidth is a bottleneck, even on internal network is essential to optimize for bandwidth

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

There are more places where bandwidth is a bottleneck now than 10 years ago.

NIC speeds have gone from 100Gbps to 800Gbps in the last few years while PCIe and DRAM speeds have nowhere increased that much. No way are you going to push all that data through to the CPU on time. Bandwidth is the bottleneck these days and will continue to be a huge issue for the foreseeable future.

permalink
report
parent
reply
81 points

People just really need to support it. It’s far better than jpg or png. It’s the go-to for web right now, that’s for sure.

permalink
report
reply
31 points

Not better than jpegXL which has clearer free licensing.

permalink
report
parent
reply
28 points

Only Apple supports this. Like, literally just Apple. I hate Chrome, and even Chrome doesn’t support this. Firefox? Yeah, zero support.

So for these reasons it’s 100% not viable right now. If you get the support, I’ll consider it for my websites, and tell my colleagues about it, though.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

Firefox supports JXL just fine and chrome did support it, but pulled support shortly after.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-6 points

But why is it better? My experience is clicking on webp format opens in browser instead of my image viewer

permalink
report
parent
reply
25 points

Webp supports 24 - bit RGB w 8 - bit Alpha channel. It also has better lossless and lossly compression. And it handles transparency and animation better than other formats at a smaller size.

It is smaller, better, and faster.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

I wish everyone would get on the same page so it would also be better for the end user.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

People just really need to support it.

This right here sir. You missed this part.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

I haven’t seen a single browser that didn’t support webp

permalink
report
parent
reply
-8 points

I’m a layperson. I don’t care about what technical benefits it has on paper when its impractical to use. So I have to agree with OP on this one.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Sounds like you need upgrade your image viewer? Everything else is loading it fine.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I use FastStone Image Viewer. Maybe there’s a plug-in I need to install?

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

It has more efficient lossy compression then JPEG. It has more efficient lossless compression then PNG. More efficient compression then gif and supports animation like gif. It allows for more colors then any of those 3. You can have a single for extension for photos graphics, and animations and costs less storage and bandwidth saving money and making a better ui.

permalink
report
parent
reply
80 points
*

As someone who has had to put together websites:

  • It is supported by every major browser
  • It is halving the amount of your mobile data that I am using sending you images (With lossy compression it does even better)
  • It is decreasing my network egress costs
  • It is increasing the number of connections I can serve in a given time period

Nope I am not going to stop using this or AVIF (which does better)

permalink
report
reply
76 points

It’s straight up better though

permalink
report
reply
15 points

So was Betamax

permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points
4 points

I’ve seen this video but I went ahead and watched it again. I stand by that it’s a great comparison, as it clearly depends on what “better” means. Webp and consumer Beta have extremely marginal technical benefits that are mostly irrelevant to the average user, compared to the use cases people actually want, which are to record football games and use digital images in Paint or almost any other software. My comment to the first post was meant to say that, but I guess it didn’t come across that way.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

The “pro” version of Betamax was good. It wasn’t the consumer version. The consumer version was no better than VHS.

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

AVIF wants to know your location

permalink
report
parent
reply

memes

!memes@lemmy.world

Create post

Community rules

1. Be civil

No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politics

This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world

3. No recent reposts

Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No bots

No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/Ads

No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.

Sister communities

Community stats

  • 13K

    Monthly active users

  • 3.5K

    Posts

  • 109K

    Comments