Did A Google Earth Mistake Cause A Couple's Brutal Murder?
Tumblr 101: Tips And Tricks To Get Started
Google offers up to a 40% discount on all JPEGs -- with new WebP format!
There's a lot of bandwidth being wasted every single second, and Google thinks they've got a pretty snazzy new way to tackle part of the problem. Behold! The new WebP image format!
Following in the freshly-trampled footsteps of its video cousin WebM, Google claims that average savings of about 40% over a comparable JPEG can be achieved. Curiously, the image they chose to provide CNet as an example only saved about half that.
Either way, smaller images file sizes would lead to faster Web page loading times, and a faster Web makes everyone happy, right? There's one downside, however -- encoding in WebP takes about eight times as long as JPEG. I'm not sure I'd even notice the difference, since eight times the fraction of a second it takes Paint.Net to save a JPEG is still a fraction of a second.
If you find yourself getting all tingly-like waiting to take a look at WebP in action, you won't be waiting long. Google says native support is coming to Chrome "in a few weeks."
Overheard on our team chat: "Anyone remember JPEG2000? Lol."
Following in the freshly-trampled footsteps of its video cousin WebM, Google claims that average savings of about 40% over a comparable JPEG can be achieved. Curiously, the image they chose to provide CNet as an example only saved about half that.
Either way, smaller images file sizes would lead to faster Web page loading times, and a faster Web makes everyone happy, right? There's one downside, however -- encoding in WebP takes about eight times as long as JPEG. I'm not sure I'd even notice the difference, since eight times the fraction of a second it takes Paint.Net to save a JPEG is still a fraction of a second.
If you find yourself getting all tingly-like waiting to take a look at WebP in action, you won't be waiting long. Google says native support is coming to Chrome "in a few weeks."
Overheard on our team chat: "Anyone remember JPEG2000? Lol."
Comments
25
Subscribe to commentsdaniel.olearySep 30th 2010 4:42PM
Just use PNG, seriously
Ntw1103Sep 30th 2010 4:48PM
1UP
MedlirOct 1st 2010 2:19PM
PNG, being lossless, is terrible for photos and results in a larger size than JPG. The goal seems to be to reduce file size.
Joakim CarlsonOct 6th 2010 1:15AM
What is it with you people shouting "use Png" everywhere? Do you really understand any of this? No, doesn't seem so.
DrakkenfyreSep 30th 2010 4:48PM
Shit, beaten to the JPEG2000 comment already.
Google needs to stop trying to recreate everything and become the standard for everything.
They see people are already learning that not everything they touch is golden. This will end up being some format supported by a handful of image tools, and then forgotten.
NyaRSep 30th 2010 5:15PM
no, google should keep going. The more THEY innovate, the more OTHERS will be forced to do the same.
I'm all for a new web format, and google is pretty good at getting the newbs on deck of new technology. Hopefully this will bring the days of BMPs to an end...
JPG still has its place for complex images. But if your img is text and simple background you'll be saving a lot of room png or webp.
DrakkenfyreSep 30th 2010 6:39PM
Google just wants to control all the formats to make money. They have no desire to innovate, they just want to control everything.
"Oh, but they would give this format away for free!" you would say. Eventually it would come down to some money. Some licensing fee once it became popular and popular image editing formats supported it.
There are already better alternatives out there, the idea isn't to create a good compression routine, but to create one they could control. Making your own format doesn't necessarily mean you make one better, but it means you control it.
And where the hell are you online that still uses BMP's?
jdlygaOct 1st 2010 2:56PM
Jpeg2000 has its uses. I work with a lot of satellite imagery that's stored in Jpeg2000 format.
clonedOct 5th 2010 1:45PM
wtf are you talking about? Since when has google presented any type of obtrusive license or limitation on anything that doesn't require a server?
Google is moving the web in the right direction.
DrakkenfyreOct 5th 2010 2:02PM
You haven't kept up on current events, have you?
The net neutrality bill they proposed had clauses that excluded them and their partners in wireless internet access.
Google is not the bring good and goodwill to everyone that they make themselves out to be. They are starting to show what greedy !@#$%^^ they really are. Check up on some of their latest stuff.
How's about Google Instant? You think it's really about making your searches faster? It actually displays Google text ads faster. You start typing a search, and it starts flashing up adsense ads along with the search results. Until you reach your actual search, you might see 10-15 different adsense ads. These ads are impressions, and there is traffic and revenue associated with them. And you can't turn this feature off.
Google wants to control the web. All of it. They have said they want to be the only advertiser in the world. They buy up tons of companies related to this, and start pimping out a new service or they change the existing service to their own. They don't want to provide a new image format for the web, they want to provide a new standard that they control. You get it for free now, but down the road there might be licensing fees for it for companies that support it.
Stop thinking Google is the best, most "awesome" company in the world. Check up on some of the crap they are doing, and how it is not in the interest of the normal person.
r3loadedSep 30th 2010 4:51PM
What happened to HD Photo?
MxxConOct 1st 2010 1:37AM
it turned into http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JPEG_XR
ChrisSep 30th 2010 5:39PM
PNG ftw. All this and an alpha channel too.
clonedOct 5th 2010 1:47PM
Yes, yes.. and completely ignore the fact that the new format would trump PNGs file size.... Did you even read the article?
benSep 30th 2010 6:11PM
Why not PNG? seriously.
MxxConOct 1st 2010 1:39AM
becuase PNG is a lossless format.
it's good for small website widgets, but it's not as good for larger images.
sometimes you don't need to preserve preserve pixel-perfect image at 4MB when 200kb jpeg is good enough.
skalpaSep 30th 2010 5:54PM
Nice, a new picture format that we will be able to use in 10 years, when everybody has upgraded to Internet Explorer 11.
Use PNG
JeebusOct 3rd 2010 7:28PM
You don't get it, do you? PNG is worse in size than even JPEG. The point is to get even smaller size than JPEG.
war59312Sep 30th 2010 11:08PM
IE 9 includes support for JPEG XR already.
r3loaded, HD Photo is JPEG XR now.
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JPEG_XR
I'm just going to take a wild guest and say it's the future pic standard of the web and not WebP.
JamesOct 1st 2010 12:56PM
I was afraid HD Photo had died a quiet death. It's good to see that it's still alive. I hope the other browsers pick this up and that it becomes the standard.