this post was submitted on 11 Nov 2023
6 points (75.0% liked)

memes

10163 readers
2505 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/AdsNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.

Sister communities

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

CloudConvert.com might as well be my fucking home page.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] LucidLethargy@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago (2 children)

People just really need to support it. It's far better than jpg or png. It's the go-to for web right now, that's for sure.

[–] hansl@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Not better than jpegXL which has clearer free licensing.

[–] LucidLethargy@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Only Apple supports this. Like, literally just Apple. I hate Chrome, and even Chrome doesn't support this. Firefox? Yeah, zero support.

So for these reasons it's 100% not viable right now. If you get the support, I'll consider it for my websites, and tell my colleagues about it, though.

[–] UndercoverUlrikHD@programming.dev 0 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

Firefox supports JXL just fine and chrome did support it, but pulled support shortly after.

[–] LucidLethargy@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

This is the source I used to originally validate my position: https://caniuse.com/jpegxl

Let me know if it's incorrect, I'd be very interested to learn of new options for the web space as a developer. This said, I googled Firefox and it came back with only "experimental support" for what I think may be an alpha release (version number ends in "a").

[–] balderdash9@lemmy.zip -1 points 11 months ago (4 children)

But why is it better? My experience is clicking on webp format opens in browser instead of my image viewer

[–] Unlearned9545@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago

It has more efficient lossy compression then JPEG. It has more efficient lossless compression then PNG. More efficient compression then gif and supports animation like gif. It allows for more colors then any of those 3. You can have a single for extension for photos graphics, and animations and costs less storage and bandwidth saving money and making a better ui.

[–] art@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

Sounds like you need upgrade your image viewer? Everything else is loading it fine.

[–] AlphaOmega@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

Webp supports 24 - bit RGB w 8 - bit Alpha channel. It also has better lossless and lossly compression. And it handles transparency and animation better than other formats at a smaller size.

It is smaller, better, and faster.

[–] somerefriedbeans@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

People just really need to support it.

This right here sir. You missed this part.

[–] Stumblinbear@pawb.social 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I haven't seen a single browser that didn't support webp

[–] Microw@lemm.ee 1 points 11 months ago

Lots of image viewers and media programs/apps dont support it currently. Which is a hassle when you've downloaded a webp and cant view or edit it.