this post was submitted on 14 Sep 2023
337 points (98.8% liked)

Technology

59223 readers
3341 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] RanchOnPancakes@lemmy.world 83 points 1 year ago (1 children)

oh no, guess we need to get rid of webp forever. Dang it.

[–] yoz@aussie.zone 19 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Hope that trash google takes itself out .

[–] Kyoyeou@slrpnk.net 31 points 1 year ago (3 children)

May I Ask why people don't like webp? I don't know the reason? To my eyes now it is a more ecological way of having pictures because of their lower weight?

[–] ultratiem@lemmy.ca 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Proprietary formats are the bane of humanity. No one company, doesn’t matter, should have control over a file format. They should all be free and universally interoperable. A PSD, for example, should present and store data the same way if used on Photoshop or Pixelmator.

Companies are not your friends.

[–] Gawdl3y@pawb.social 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

WebP is not proprietary. It's an open format, is not patent-encumbered, and its reference implementation/libraries are open-source. It is driven mostly by Google, similar to Chromium.

[–] ultratiem@lemmy.ca -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They took the open source WebKit to develop Chrome and Chromium.

How did that turn out?

Google wants to own images. Doesn’t matter if they made the licensing whatever. They make webp. They have a personal vested interest in control.

You trust Google???

[–] abhibeckert@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

They took the open source WebKit to develop Chrome and Chromium.

How did that turn out?

Perfectly? Web browsers are way better now than they ever have been.

Google wants to own images. Doesn’t matter if they made the licensing whatever. They make webp. They have a personal vested interest in control.

WebP is a little better than PNG/JPEG and way better than GIF. That's all that really matters.

You trust Google???

Hell no. I reluctantly watch a bit of content that's exclusively available on YouTube. Don't use anything else of theirs and I'd drop YouTube in a heartbeat if I could find that content elsewhere.

[–] Valmond@lemmy.mindoki.com 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This is just me, but when I download a PNG I know it's lossless, when I download a jpeg I know it is lossy but probably a "photo-like" image, a gif? You get it.

One firmat to rule them all will get you badly compressed pixel graphics and unnecessary large "photo" images and so on, not because the format is bad, but if it lets you do so, people will (and companies obviously).

Most images on the internet are way under a MB, is there really that important to lower it slightly?

[–] ipkpjersi@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

Most images on the internet are way under a MB, is there really that important to lower it slightly?

It's because companies always want to include 100 or 200 or 1000 pictures, because of all the products they are selling, they want to sell them all and right away.

It's dumb, I hate it. lol

[–] Gawdl3y@pawb.social 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It's a better format than JPEG, GIF, or PNG, while doing the jobs of all of those, but better (in most cases), and is an open format. It also has wide compatibility nowadays. The only major downside is a lot of social media services don't even think about it being a potential format due to a lack of awareness/wide usage, leading to a degraded experience when someone shares a WebP somewhere (lack of auto-embedding as an example). I suspect this is why it gets a lot of hate here, which is unfortunate because it's not at all the fault of the format.

AVIF (based on AV1) is the up-and-coming format that beats WebP in most cases now, but support isn't quite there yet (mostly due to Apple), and it has the same problems for social media as WebP. However, it doesn't have any true lossless mode AFAIK. HEIF (based on HEVC) is also good, but is heavily patent-encumbered and not as open. JPEG-XL is dope and potentially even better in some aspects, but has very poor support across the board.