5 ms·

> None of them is feature complete, but it's because each of them is a hobby, single-person project Which is why they're not considered implementations to meet

> None of them is feature complete, but it's because each of them is a hobby, single-person project Which is why they're not considered implementations to meet this bar. You need multiple FULL implementations to ensure that it is actually FULLY viable, otherwise you risk taking on a potentially broken format that you can't remove. > You're making it sound like some billion-dollar company tried to implement JPEG XL and failed, because it's too complex or something. I doubt any big company actually tried (or tried very hard). Cost of implementation becomes a kind of implicit test here, because companies like things cheap. > AVIF uses its own container format that had to be implemented. Implementing AV1 does not give you AVIF support for free. It gives AVIF support for cheap due to code/algorithm re-use. Companies like things cheap, so that's a big selling point.

pornel 4y ago
To be fair, you don't need a FULL implementation. You just need some safe subset that everyone agreed on. For example, even the old JPEG was never fully implemented in browsers — arithmetic coding is not supported.
prirun 4y ago
> I doubt any big company actually tried (or tried very hard). Cost of implementation becomes a kind of implicit test here, because companies like things cheap. So if an individual unpaid volunteer spends their time doing a 2nd implementation, <bigco> might consider it for their browser. But they won't pay for a 2nd implementation with their own staff, even if they own a humongous chunk of the browser market (which comes with responsibilities) and even if it is a better algorithm. Sounds about right.
- kstenerud 4y ago
  It's all about incentives. If there's enough incentive for them to do it, they will. "Better" doesn't always have much to do with it. We make incremental gains as a human race, not necessarily optimal ones.

pornel 4y ago

To be fair, you don't need a FULL implementation. You just need some safe subset that everyone agreed on. For example, even the old JPEG was never fully implemented in browsers — arithmetic coding is not supported.

prirun 4y ago

> I doubt any big company actually tried (or tried very hard). Cost of implementation becomes a kind of implicit test here, because companies like things cheap. So if an individual unpaid volunteer spends their time doing a 2nd implementation, <bigco> might consider it for their browser. But they won't pay for a 2nd implementation with their own staff, even if they own a humongous chunk of the browser market (which comes with responsibilities) and even if it is a better algorithm. Sounds about right.

kstenerud 4y ago
It's all about incentives. If there's enough incentive for them to do it, they will. "Better" doesn't always have much to do with it. We make incremental gains as a human race, not necessarily optimal ones.