←back to thread

A new PNG spec

(www.programmax.net)
616 points bluedel | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.458s | source
Show context
poisonborz ◴[] No.44375523[source]
Not backwards compatible. We just add it to that nice cupboard "great advanced image formats we will forget about".

Society doesn't need a new image format. I'd wager to say not any new multimedia format. Big corporate entites do, and have churning them out at a steady pace.

Look at poor webp - a format pushed by the largest industry players - and the abysmal everyday use it gets, and the hate it generates.

replies(10): >>44375537 #>>44375557 #>>44375998 #>>44376442 #>>44376512 #>>44376957 #>>44376999 #>>44377083 #>>44377151 #>>44380128 #
dev_l1x_be ◴[] No.44377083[source]
> Look at poor webp

What about it?

"Lossless WebP is typically 26% smaller than PNG, while lossy WebP can be 25-34% smaller than JPEG at equivalent quality levels"

This literally saves houndred of thousand of cost, bandwith, electricity every month on the internet. In fact, I strongly belive that this is one of the greatest contributions from Google to society just like ZSTD from Facebook.

https://developers.google.com/speed/webp/docs/webp_study

replies(4): >>44377217 #>>44378458 #>>44383750 #>>44386150 #
Timwi ◴[] No.44377217[source]
I don't think the commenter you replied to disagrees with any of that. They were talking about poor rates of adoption, not its feature set.
replies(1): >>44377470 #
1. dev_l1x_be ◴[] No.44377470[source]
The biggest driver of adoption are features.

"WebP is used by 16.7% of all websites. This means that while it's a popular image format, it's not yet the dominant format, with JPEG still holding the majority share at 73.0%, according to W3Techs. However, WebP offers significant advantages in terms of compression and file size, making it a preferred choice for many web developers. "