4 ms·

Exactly! It’s like asking why we still use wheels when hovercrafts exist. If humans are still around in a thousand years they’ll be using jpegs and they’ll sti

Exactly! It’s like asking why we still use wheels when hovercrafts exist. If humans are still around in a thousand years they’ll be using jpegs and they’ll still be using them a thousand years after that. When things work they have pernicious tendency to stick around.

pbhjpbhj 1y ago
Can JPEG do 3D somehow (I'm thinking VR/AR)? DVDs lasted well, until the medium itself moved to cheap NAND flash and then various SSD technologies. When/if simple screens get usurped then we'll likely move on from JPEG. I'm sure you were being a little flippant but your last sentence shows good insight. Someone said "we just need it to work" to me the other day and the "if it works there will be little impetus to improve it"-flag went off in my brain.
- wizardforhire 1y ago
  Thanks, thats a great insight! Idk about 3d, but I’ll assume someone probably will tape something out necessity if they haven't already. …and yes, very flippant! But not without good reason. If we are to extrapolate; the popularity of jpeg, love it or hate it, will invariably necessitate it’s continued compatibility contributing to my pervious statement. That compatibility will invariably lead to plausible hypothetical circumstances where future developers out of laziness, ignorance, or just plain conformity to norms will lead to its choice and use perpetuating the cycle. The tendency as such is that short of a radical mass extension level like event brought about by mass wide spread technological adoption such as what you describe is why I don’t see it going away anytime soon. Not to say it couldn’t happen, I just feel it’s highly improbable because of the contributing human factors. That jpeg gets so many complaints is I feel for two reasons. One, its ubiquity and two, that we actually see it! Some similar situations that don’t get nearly as much attention but are far more pervasive are tcp/ip, bash, ntpd, ad nauseam. All old pervasive protocols so embedded as to be taken for granted, and also not able to be seen. I’ll leave with this engineering truism that I feel should be more widely adhered to in software development, especially by UI designers: if it ain’t broke don’t fix it!
- adgjlsfhk1 1y ago
  depends what you mean by 3d. jpeg-xl does let you add arbitrary channels, so you could add a depth channel, but it's not going to do a good job for full 3d (e.g. light field/point cloud). one place I think jxl will really shine is PBR and game textures. for cases like that, it's very common to have color+transparency+bump map+normal map, and potentially even more. bundling all of those into a single file allows for away better compression
- tehjoker 1y ago
  Jp3d can do 3d, but it is not well supported. It is an extension to the JPEG2000 specification iirc.
dsr_ 1y ago
Wheels continue to support a load without power. Wheels are vastly superior to hover technologies in the crucial areas of steering and controlled braking. (For uncontrolled braking, you just cut the power to your hover fans and lift the skirts...) It turns out to be remarkably difficult to get a hovercraft to go up an incline... Wheels are both suspension and traction in one system. There's no particular physical advantage to JPEG over the others mentioned; it's just currently ubiquitous.
eviks 1y ago
Besides the awful wheel comparison, there are dozens of formats that worked and stuck around until they got replaced, so this also tells us nothing on such a huge timescale

pbhjpbhj 1y ago

Can JPEG do 3D somehow (I'm thinking VR/AR)? DVDs lasted well, until the medium itself moved to cheap NAND flash and then various SSD technologies. When/if simple screens get usurped then we'll likely move on from JPEG. I'm sure you were being a little flippant but your last sentence shows good insight. Someone said "we just need it to work" to me the other day and the "if it works there will be little impetus to improve it"-flag went off in my brain.

wizardforhire 1y ago
Thanks, thats a great insight! Idk about 3d, but I’ll assume someone probably will tape something out necessity if they haven't already. …and yes, very flippant! But not without good reason. If we are to extrapolate; the popularity of jpeg, love it or hate it, will invariably necessitate it’s continued compatibility contributing to my pervious statement. That compatibility will invariably lead to plausible hypothetical circumstances where future developers out of laziness, ignorance, or just plain conformity to norms will lead to its choice and use perpetuating the cycle. The tendency as such is that short of a radical mass extension level like event brought about by mass wide spread technological adoption such as what you describe is why I don’t see it going away anytime soon. Not to say it couldn’t happen, I just feel it’s highly improbable because of the contributing human factors. That jpeg gets so many complaints is I feel for two reasons. One, its ubiquity and two, that we actually see it! Some similar situations that don’t get nearly as much attention but are far more pervasive are tcp/ip, bash, ntpd, ad nauseam. All old pervasive protocols so embedded as to be taken for granted, and also not able to be seen. I’ll leave with this engineering truism that I feel should be more widely adhered to in software development, especially by UI designers: if it ain’t broke don’t fix it!
adgjlsfhk1 1y ago
depends what you mean by 3d. jpeg-xl does let you add arbitrary channels, so you could add a depth channel, but it's not going to do a good job for full 3d (e.g. light field/point cloud). one place I think jxl will really shine is PBR and game textures. for cases like that, it's very common to have color+transparency+bump map+normal map, and potentially even more. bundling all of those into a single file allows for away better compression
tehjoker 1y ago
Jp3d can do 3d, but it is not well supported. It is an extension to the JPEG2000 specification iirc.

dsr_ 1y ago

Wheels continue to support a load without power. Wheels are vastly superior to hover technologies in the crucial areas of steering and controlled braking. (For uncontrolled braking, you just cut the power to your hover fans and lift the skirts...) It turns out to be remarkably difficult to get a hovercraft to go up an incline... Wheels are both suspension and traction in one system. There's no particular physical advantage to JPEG over the others mentioned; it's just currently ubiquitous.

eviks 1y ago

Besides the awful wheel comparison, there are dozens of formats that worked and stuck around until they got replaced, so this also tells us nothing on such a huge timescale