4 ms·
WebP is good iff it improves rendering times (which it does). That's not google's fault really. Any way you can come up with to optimize images is valid under C
by djtriptych 5y ago
WebP is good iff it improves rendering times (which it does). That's not google's fault really. Any way you can come up with to optimize images is valid under Core Web Vitals. I really don't think any of it is skewed towards Google's solutions except the testing/measurement methodology. I would love open source data collection across browsers for instance.
Lazy-loading can be implemented sloppily, but browser-native lazy loading is now good enough to be considered optimal.
- WillPostForFood 5y agobrowser-native lazy loading is now good enough to be considered optimal The problem is that Google Page Speed dings you for not having lazy loading, and people add crappy JavaScript lazy loading that satisfies Google, but makes the user experience worse. WebP is good iff it improves rendering times (which it does). That's not google's fault really. The problem has been, until recently, Safari didn't support WebP, so you had to implement a fallback to jpg. More complicated HTML, more images to compress and manage, all for a very marginal improvement.
- hexa22 5y agoMost sites would use the user agent for this but I’m pretty sure HTML now has a picture tag which can have multiple sources so the browser can pick the source it wants.
- snowwrestler 5y agoHow does WebP improve rendering times?
- hexa22 5y agoIt takes less space so it downloads faster.