- YouTube
www.youtube.com
Profitez des vidéos et de la musique que vous aimez, mettez en ligne des contenus originaux, et partagez-les avec vos amis, vos proches et le monde entier.
    • ProdigalFrog@slrpnk.netOPEnglish
      123·
      1 month ago

      JPEG is getting old long in the tooth, which prompted the creation of JPEG XL, which is a fairly future-proof new compression standard that can compress images to the same file size or smaller than regular JPEG while having massively higher quality.

      However, JPEG XL support was removed from Google Chrome based browsers in favor of AVIF, a standalone image compression derived from the AV1 video compression codec that is decidedly not future-proof, having some hard-coded limitations, as well as missing some very nice to have features that JPEG XL offers such as progressive image loading and lower hardware requirements. The result of this is that JPEG XL adoption will be severely hamstrung by Google’s decision, which is ultimately pretty lame.

        • ℍ𝕂-𝟞𝟝@sopuli.xyzEnglish
          58·
          1 month ago

          Not almost monopoly.

          Google is a monopolist, and it has acted as one to maintain its monopoly,

          - the US govt

        • Steve@communick.newsEnglish
          26·
          1 month ago

          Monopolies don’t require 100% of a market. Just enough to effectively manipulate a market.

          One firm might only be 10% of a market. But if every other firm is only 1-2%, that 10% will have an outsized monopolistic ability to manipulate that market.

        • Norah - She/They@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
          9·
          1 month ago

          AV1 Image File Format is an open, royalty-free image file format

          While I am by no means trying to defend Google, or their monopoly, I’m struggling to see how this time is a “clear example” of monopolistic behaviour?

          Like, take for contrast the Moving Picture Experts Group (MPEG) image format HEIC, which Apple has adopted as it’s main high-res format on iOS. It’s proprietary, and that fact is indeed worrying. However, the only reason I can figure out for Google’s move here being a ‘bad’ thing, is if you’re nostalgic about the .jpg extension…

          • nossaquesapao@lemmy.eco.br
            14·
            1 month ago

            I didn’t mean the choice of image format is a monopolistic behavior, but that the monopoly puts google in a position that any choice they make, be it a good or bad one, becomes an industry standard, without others having any choice in it.

        • Skull giver@popplesburger.hilciferous.nl
          2·
          1 month ago

          Other browser vendors like Microsoft and Brave and Opera could’ve added XL support if they wanted to. It’s not just Google, none of the browser makers want to deal with yet another image format. Only Safari supports the protocol, and even then they don’t support animated images.

          IE and pre-Chromium Edge implemented JPEG XR and nobody followed. Safari implemented JPEG 2000 and nobody followed. Implementing an image codec is a lot of work and adds attack surface for hackers, nobody really wants to do that unless they have to.

          We have JPEG, we have WebP if you need smaller images than JPEG, and we have AVIF if you want something smaller than PNG for photographs. Unless all of the competition implements JPEG XL again, I don’t think they have any reason to bother. Especially with the whole patent vagueness.

      • Zoop@beehaw.org
        26·
        1 month ago

        Once again I find myself thinking, “Dammit, Google!”

        Thank you very much for the text summary, I really appreciate it :)