3 ms·
I don't agree that it's a win for users, because the format can only be used in the browser. There may be work-arounds, but forcing users to work around a large
by falcolas 6y ago
I don't agree that it's a win for users, because the format can only be used in the browser. There may be work-arounds, but forcing users to work around a largely unsupported image format is hostile to users.
- Spivak 6y agoI mean it’s not only supported in browsers just the motivation for its existence is browsers. It will likely get the same level of support as WebP which is “not ubiquitous but well supported.” If you are someone who looks at image formats and says “wow this is really wasteful, we could be doing so much better” then your constraints make it a no win. Nobody adopts formats that aren’t supported, and nobody supports formats that aren’t used. And users are just stuck with waste forever. Somebody has to break the ice and Google using the format in a non-disruptive setting of Google talking to Google is pretty conservative. If it was Adobe’s new format they would bootstrap it by making it the default in Photoshop or Apple would make it the default format for the camera or something.