3 ms·

This is one of the many problems that come from Google having so much market power. This is really the Google development practices being forced onto everyone;

by mpol 6y ago

This is one of the many problems that come from Google having so much market power. This is really the Google development practices being forced onto everyone; iterate fast, create new stuff and throw old stuff away when you feel like it. I do hope other browser makers like Mozilla Firefox and Apple Safari will hold back on this, like they should have done with Webp v1.

srgpqt 6y ago
Safari only just got webp support super recently. Seems like they held back on it long enough...
- Eric_WVGG 6y ago
  Also note that it’s only Safari 14 on the new OS releases; Safari 14 on Mojave can’t view them.
jefftk 6y ago
WebP was introduced in September 2010, Mozilla started supporting it in Firefox in 2019, and Apple is just adding it to Safari now. You think they should have waited longer than 10 years? (Disclosure: I work for Google, speaking only for myself)
- lukeramsden 6y ago
  They should have waited indefinitely. WebP has been a big source of confusion for non-technical people I know, trying to download images from the internet.
  - xbmcuser 6y ago
    If you want to stop progress for the least technically inclined to accept you will stop all progress for ever.
    - lukeramsden 6y ago
      > If you want to stop progress for the least technically inclined to accept you will stop all progress for ever. This is a strawman, at no point am I or would I ever claim this is a good idea. At what point is progress too much progress? Why can't we also balance these things with backwards compatibility, interoperability, accessibility, and other such things? > least technically inclined How many people actually know what WebP is, as opposed to thinking its some sort of bug with google or their browser? The least technically minded are more than a majority of users, more like the vast majority. Is their usage not valued?
      - seba_dos1 6y ago
        Once WebP starts to get used more and more and people will stumble on issues with *.webp files they have no idea what to do with, their OSes and tools that they use will start to handle WebP files and the users will eventually learn what it is the same way they learned what JPEG is in the past. I don't know where the line of "too much progress" is, but you need to start that feedback loop somewhere.
- mpol 6y ago
  Yes, I also think they should have waited indefinitely. I don't trust Google to care about backwards compatibility and keep on supporting Webp v1 forever, I would expect them to drop it before even dropping jpeg or png. Especially in this case, where it mostly serves Google and other big web corporations, and not regular users. Mozilla always had the stance that they wouldn't just add support for technology that might be just a passer-by technology. I think that was the right choice and I think it is a shame they added support for webp recently. I can even imagine this to be market practice, where they add new stuff, where Apple and Mozilla and newcomers have to chase Google's fad of the day, while Google has enormous resources for Chrome. You can call me paranoid, I probably am :) Anyway, if Google Chrome ditches Webp v1 in the next 10 years, I will not be that guy to say "Told you so!", but I will think it for sure.
  - layoutIfNeeded 6y ago
    Nah, why would Google do that? Oh wait... that’s exactly what they’re doing with HTTP/2 Push.
    - jefftk 6y ago
      Server push is an optional extra, and the browser can drop support without hurting compatibility at all. The browser cannot drop support for an image format without major compatibility issues. If you would like to bet on whether webp is still supported in Chrome in a decade I'd be happy to ;) (Disclosure: I work for Google, and have no internal information on this)

by mpol 6y ago

srgpqt 6y ago

Safari only just got webp support super recently. Seems like they held back on it long enough...

Eric_WVGG 6y ago
Also note that it’s only Safari 14 on the new OS releases; Safari 14 on Mojave can’t view them.

jefftk 6y ago

WebP was introduced in September 2010, Mozilla started supporting it in Firefox in 2019, and Apple is just adding it to Safari now. You think they should have waited longer than 10 years? (Disclosure: I work for Google, speaking only for myself)

lukeramsden 6y ago
They should have waited indefinitely. WebP has been a big source of confusion for non-technical people I know, trying to download images from the internet.
- xbmcuser 6y ago
  If you want to stop progress for the least technically inclined to accept you will stop all progress for ever.
  - lukeramsden 6y ago
    > If you want to stop progress for the least technically inclined to accept you will stop all progress for ever. This is a strawman, at no point am I or would I ever claim this is a good idea. At what point is progress too much progress? Why can't we also balance these things with backwards compatibility, interoperability, accessibility, and other such things? > least technically inclined How many people actually know what WebP is, as opposed to thinking its some sort of bug with google or their browser? The least technically minded are more than a majority of users, more like the vast majority. Is their usage not valued?
    - seba_dos1 6y ago
      Once WebP starts to get used more and more and people will stumble on issues with *.webp files they have no idea what to do with, their OSes and tools that they use will start to handle WebP files and the users will eventually learn what it is the same way they learned what JPEG is in the past. I don't know where the line of "too much progress" is, but you need to start that feedback loop somewhere.
mpol 6y ago
Yes, I also think they should have waited indefinitely. I don't trust Google to care about backwards compatibility and keep on supporting Webp v1 forever, I would expect them to drop it before even dropping jpeg or png. Especially in this case, where it mostly serves Google and other big web corporations, and not regular users. Mozilla always had the stance that they wouldn't just add support for technology that might be just a passer-by technology. I think that was the right choice and I think it is a shame they added support for webp recently. I can even imagine this to be market practice, where they add new stuff, where Apple and Mozilla and newcomers have to chase Google's fad of the day, while Google has enormous resources for Chrome. You can call me paranoid, I probably am :) Anyway, if Google Chrome ditches Webp v1 in the next 10 years, I will not be that guy to say "Told you so!", but I will think it for sure.
- layoutIfNeeded 6y ago
  Nah, why would Google do that? Oh wait... that’s exactly what they’re doing with HTTP/2 Push.
  - jefftk 6y ago
    Server push is an optional extra, and the browser can drop support without hurting compatibility at all. The browser cannot drop support for an image format without major compatibility issues. If you would like to bet on whether webp is still supported in Chrome in a decade I'd be happy to ;) (Disclosure: I work for Google, and have no internal information on this)