>If you're trying to introduce a whole new codec, you've got a big hurdle to jump. Agreed, I think the big hurdle is simply that jpeg is 'good enough' for web

>If you're trying to introduce a whole new codec, you've got a big hurdle to jump. Agreed, I think the big hurdle is simply that jpeg is 'good enough' for web use, and that a transition to a new standard lossy image format just isn't 'worth the hassle' so to speak. As for webp, I personally use it for lossless encoding instead of PNG on personal files these days, but I don't really use it for lossy as I don't think it makes a big enough difference versus jpg and jpg is supported everywhere. That said the current webp implementation is based upon VP8, so I suppose the next implementation will be based upon VP9 which would likely make it competitive with the HEVC based image codec, and unlike the HEVC based one it isn't patent/royalty encumbered.