• shootwhatsmyname@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    145
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    You get the exact same quality at around ~25% smaller than other image formats. Unfortunate that it’s not supported by everything, but yeah it’s a better image format practically in that sense.

    On the web this saves money when storing at a large scale, and it can have a significant impact on page speed when loading websites on slower connections.

    • NBJack@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      11 months ago

      I’d rather see the savings in the army of Javascript I apparently need today for the ‘modern’ web experience. Image files have gotten lots of love, but hey, here’s a shitty 27 year old language designed for validating form input!

    • Taleya@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      11 months ago

      Save a lot more debloating your code. Storage is cheap. Processing power is not.

      • binarybomb@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        There are still places where bandwidth is a bottleneck, even on internal network is essential to optimize for bandwidth

        • StarDreamer@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          11 months ago

          There are more places where bandwidth is a bottleneck now than 10 years ago.

          NIC speeds have gone from 100Gbps to 800Gbps in the last few years while PCIe and DRAM speeds have nowhere increased that much. No way are you going to push all that data through to the CPU on time. Bandwidth is the bottleneck these days and will continue to be a huge issue for the foreseeable future.