1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

News Google targets JPEG with WebP

Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by CardJoe, 1 Oct 2010.

  1. CardJoe

    CardJoe Freelance Journalist

    Joined:
    3 Apr 2007
    Posts:
    11,343
    Likes Received:
    292
  2. yuusou

    yuusou Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    5 Nov 2006
    Posts:
    2,068
    Likes Received:
    313
    If it supports transparency like PNG, I'm all up for this.
     
  3. greigaitken

    greigaitken Member

    Joined:
    26 Aug 2009
    Posts:
    401
    Likes Received:
    3
    good in theory and perhaps practice too, but so are dvorak keyboards and i dont see them taking over.
     
  4. Mraedis

    Mraedis New Member

    Joined:
    5 Sep 2009
    Posts:
    153
    Likes Received:
    0
    That's because Dvorak requires you to physically change something, this is a software change.
     
  5. mi1ez

    mi1ez Active Member

    Joined:
    11 Jun 2009
    Posts:
    1,442
    Likes Received:
    18
    I think JPEG is too prevalent to be replaced any time soon.
     
  6. Evildead666

    Evildead666 New Member

    Joined:
    27 May 2004
    Posts:
    340
    Likes Received:
    4
    I use PNG anyway.
    Don't like the lossy nature of JPG
     
  7. mi1ez

    mi1ez Active Member

    Joined:
    11 Jun 2009
    Posts:
    1,442
    Likes Received:
    18
    PNG's good for drawn pictures but looks terrible with photos, like GIF did in the past.
     
  8. eddtox

    eddtox Homo Interneticus

    Joined:
    7 Jan 2006
    Posts:
    1,296
    Likes Received:
    15
    This could be very nice indeed. Isn't JPG a proprietary (albeit ubiquitous) standard?
    Anything that helps us get the same quality of content with less bandwidth usage is a win.
     
  9. KayDat

    KayDat New Member

    Joined:
    20 Nov 2006
    Posts:
    86
    Likes Received:
    0
    PNG's can look good too, just that file sizes will be much larger compared to an equivalent JPG.
     
  10. iwog

    iwog Linux cursed

    Joined:
    14 Jun 2007
    Posts:
    908
    Likes Received:
    34
    The web is getting faster and faster, HDDs are getting bigger and bigger and images are remaining kinda the same size. Wouldn't this have been more useful 10-15 years ago when we were all fighting with dial up? I just don't see the need for this kind of compression and space saving in this day and age.

    Yes it is technically impressive when you can make something a 10th of the size that does the same job but does it really matter when all you're doing is changing the percentage used from 0.01% to 0.001% when cumulative usage is still about 40%?
     
  11. Slavedriver

    Slavedriver New Member

    Joined:
    10 Feb 2009
    Posts:
    21
    Likes Received:
    0
    The "web" is not getting faster. It's getting more JavaScripted and Flashy. Don't forget that a lot of "web" consumers now use smartphones and handling traffic on GPRS connection just is not fun. At all. Remember that not every county has ubiquitous WiFi and 4G coverage.
     
  12. Florian

    Florian New Member

    Joined:
    4 Jun 2004
    Posts:
    137
    Likes Received:
    1
    Unless they find a way to support legacy browsers without requiring any user interaction (installing plugins, etc), I don't see this catching on anytime soon.

    Take a look at how long it took for PNG to be widely used/supported, and IE *still* doesn't support the format properly.
     
  13. mrbens

    mrbens New Member

    Joined:
    15 Aug 2009
    Posts:
    511
    Likes Received:
    4
    That may be true but hard drive space isn't infinite yet so any saving with no image loss is still good news.
     
  14. CHiwi

    CHiwi New Member

    Joined:
    16 Jun 2006
    Posts:
    7
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think your also only thinking about the consumer side here. I work for a e-commerce company, and we have about 6TB of product images and counting. Server storage and backup is costly, not to mention all the traffic. Serving JPGS accounts for about 70% of our traffic, so any ways to reduce this would be interesting.

    It'll will be interesting to see how the format performs vs jpg in the wild and what the browser adoption rate is.
     
  15. eddtox

    eddtox Homo Interneticus

    Joined:
    7 Jan 2006
    Posts:
    1,296
    Likes Received:
    15
    Although the web in some areas is indeed getting faster, a large part of the population is still on slow connections. Not to mention the fact bandwidth will still be a consideration (which is why using a smartphone in central london two years ago was a nightmare) even if we have high-speed connections.

    Also, as photographic resolutions continue to increase, better image compression will continue to be an important factor.

    Not to mention that the better we can compress the things we send down the tubes, the more stuff we will be able to send, regardless of the quality of the infrastructure.

    In the western world we are accustomed to "unlimited bandwidth" connections, but there is no such thing as unlimited bandwidth. Every byte sent down the tubes has a (infinitesimally small) cost. Doing more for less is a worthwhile pursuit.
     
  16. Icy EyeG

    Icy EyeG Controlled by Eyebrow Powers™

    Joined:
    23 Jul 2007
    Posts:
    517
    Likes Received:
    3
  17. Fizzban

    Fizzban Man of Many Typos

    Joined:
    10 Mar 2010
    Posts:
    3,339
    Likes Received:
    118
    Sounds good. Have to wait and see if it catchs on.
     
  18. iwog

    iwog Linux cursed

    Joined:
    14 Jun 2007
    Posts:
    908
    Likes Received:
    34
    Ok maybe web was a poor choice of words. Typical internet speeds are getting faster, more internet is being consumed and web is making up a smaller percentage of that, source. So for the general populace, those who typically browse using laptops or PCs at home/work this change is relatively meaningless. Especially as their tastes are changing and actual web (html, javascript et al) usage is declining as a percentage, this is why I haven't heard of any major breakthroughs in DNS or FTP.

    However I do agree that doing more with less is beneficial, though only to a point. We currently live in an age where data and its transmission is in abundance rather then scarcity. So if we all have these pipes entering our homes providing us with access to the internet and the pipes keep growing inline with or faster then our demand for the internet then small optimisations such as reducing image size aren't going to matter as much. Though if we assume that growth in our demand for internet is greater then growth in our ability to supply it then these optimisations matter, but they only matter if our consumption of the types of internet remain constant. Clearly that isn't true, in recent years video sites and internet radio has seen greater growth then traditional web.

    Yes smart-phones and other portable devices have created a resurgence in the demand for web but as soon as those devices support the bandwidth to consume current internet regularly we'll see a drop off again in the demand for web.

    True this only applies to western countries where the internet is not a scare commodity but then again this is where the money is and unfortunately as history has taught us a great invention isn't worth squat if it isn't worth something to someone else.

    TLDR: Yes its good but see this as to why it doesn't matter too much and make your own conclusions.
     
  19. Phil Rhodes

    Phil Rhodes Hypernobber

    Joined:
    27 Jul 2006
    Posts:
    1,415
    Likes Received:
    10
    Creating a stills compression technique 40% better than JPEG isn't very hard. The mathematics used in DV (that is, video tape) compression is effectively identical, with a few actually fairly minor changes which mean that 3:1 JPEG is often reckoned to be as good as 5:1 DV. You can work out what that is in percentages, but if you consider that JPEG-2000 is felt to be even better than that, it becomes clear that compression performance isn't really the primary driver for new still image formats on the web.
     
  20. dyzophoria

    dyzophoria Member

    Joined:
    3 May 2004
    Posts:
    391
    Likes Received:
    1
    problem is jpeg is like windows xp, its hard to budge even if a better OS is out (7),lol, I remember MS's jpeg XR, had transparency, and also reduces jpeg file sizes, whats better is that it also supported the extended dynamic range yey, jpeg is still here
     
Tags: Add Tags

Share This Page