Why is JPEG still so heavily used in the modern day where file size is no longer such a big issue

> Phoneposters

>where file size is no longer such a big issue
It is a big issue. Try moving a couple of Tb between machines and see how important it is.

use JPEG2000

Gay and as patent-encumbered [in the USA, but unfortunately that still somewhat matters for web standards for now] as better options.

Have a look at what's actually in the race these days: wyohknott.github.io/image-formats-comparison/

>file size is no longer such a big issue
t. Nu-male webdev

Is that the old Packard factory?

File size is ALWAYS an issue you cretin.

I think so:
> wyohknott.github.io/image-formats-comparison/cite_images.txt
> commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Abandoned_Packard_Automobile_Factory_Detroit_200.jpg

>such a big issue
still an issue, you even answered it yourself, you stupid hyper autist kys

Attached: 1418845764561.jpg (306x306, 17K)

ITT: DSL users

ah no if your in Australia you probably only get 1-4 mbps, that's bits might i say, i my self barely get 6mbps to my place to share between 5 people occasionally more and we're not skimping out on cost, the nbn in our area is about as bad too but double the price

Are you trying to trigger /p/ op?

Because America still has internet from the 90s.

Just because I have something does not mean I should use it.

>tfw when work computers upgraded from windows 2000 a few months ago.

because every png you post hurts Jow Forums
don't increase hiro's hosting bill, compress that jpeg.

Attached: ride with reddit.jpg (2402x3000, 852K)

That sucks and you should change your government or whatever it takes to fix this and join up with $70 or less a month for symmetrical unlimited gigabit countries.

But it probably doesn't really stop you from loading images all that much anyhow. And I don't think Australia had much influence about what gets used in a larger sense.

Why is gen z so solipsistic and also don't even know what that word means?

Attached: 555.jpg (338x305, 78K)

>file size is no longer such a big issue

it wasnt an issue for pc users, but then phonefags came along and fucked everyone in the ass, just like consoles hold gaming tech back, phones hold net tech back

Because you don't always need super HD quality for most things.
for most applications JPG looks good enough, why fuck with a good thing?

> JPG looks good enough
The problem is .jpg formats sightly loses quality each time it gets shared and shared through sharing and uploading sites. Better image formats such as .png doesn't has this issue.

>jpg formats sightly loses quality each time it gets shared
no it doesn't. only each time it gets recompressed. a png will be compressed too by these same sites so it solves nothing. if you download a jpeg from Jow Forums and repost it to Jow Forums it will have exactly the same quality as the original.

>file size is no longer such a big issue
Tell that to my hard drive full of porn

It’s not about jpeg, we just need to use a more efficient format like WebP. Bandwidth is still an issue, it takes significantly longer to load a PNG on my phone via mobile data, I just skip over them simply because I don’t want to wait on it to load.

It’s not about space, it’s about bandwidth usage trying to serve a whole webpage full of 3MB PNGs. Imagine if this thread was 100% PNG. Let’s say what, 30 images are posted in here. That’s 90MB on average just for this thread.

>file size is no longer such a big issue
Do you have any idea how big a photo from a modern smartphone camera is?

unless it went tru
pngquant --nofs

jpogs are cool

Look at how terrible your .png you posted is and find out why.

>his data cap is under 10GB

github.com/fhanau/Efficient-Compression-Tool
work for it you plebs

>have jpg that looks the exact same as a png
>might as well use the png since it takes more space right?
i wish i were this smart

>have jpg that looks the exact same as a png
only possible if you're converting jpg to png. any program that works in the RBG colorspace will be unable to save a jpg and a png to be raster perfect to each other. You can work in jpg colorspace, but that will still not produce raster-perfect copies in png and jpg

WebPoop is just too niggerlicious

This. Why can't niggers understand??

>Not having an unlimited plan
Lol what a nigger

webp can suck wet flaccid cock, they refused to split the format in lossy and lossless strict or to introduce a file format difference, so they can go fuck themselves

t. intellectual who zooms in on his pngs to verify they haven't been converted from jpg

t. 20/30 phoneposter

I did back in Latvia.
But not here in Denmark

It's not really about file size for you but for the website owner, why would anyone use pngs for absolutely no reason and double the size of their entire image storage just to have absolutely no difference on image?

You use jpg if there's a lot of different colors
You use png if there's mostly one/few colors

it's that simple, they're going to (hopefully) be minified and lose a lot of quality anyway in most cases so who fucking cares really, in the end you'll be looking at a jpg with like 80% of it's original quality to save space.

>not denoting a physical quantity
>no space between unit and suffix

Please re-read the SI Brochure.

>Why is JPEG still so heavily used in the modern day where file size is no longer such a big issue

Attached: 1523554690834.jpg (403x448, 38K)

>file size is no longer an issue
Since fucking when? I smell pajeet.

>file size is no longer such a big issue
Only a complete tech illiterate would think this...

Attached: O0QkrgR.jpg (1280x720, 97K)

>finally faster speeds and more memory everywhere
>now everything will be a lot faster
>retards use it an excuse to bloat up everything more
>everything is slow again

What kind of nigger infested shithole country do you live in if you don't get unlimited interwebs?

>ah no if your in Australia you probably only get 1-4 mbps
You do know a lot of the world gets shit Internet, right? Rural areas even in rich countries like the US either get shitty satellite with a tiny-as-fuck cap or get screwed by near dialup speeds, nigger.

>pic related. It is my shit-tier internet.

Attached: Uh huh sure.png (346x343, 21K)

Since when is filesize not an issue? Bandwidth costs websites tons of money. And slower page load times statistically decrease user engagement.

Apple didnt exsist in WW2

Attached: 1522116588032.jpg (326x326, 25K)

Tier, not literally you tard

>Having a data cap
lmao

stop being poor

Storage size is not issue, bandwidth is. Every kb in storage means a much more if the content is actively served to millions of devices. Especially when user browses content from multiple devices, because cache cannot be shared.

I never use jpg. All my content is in lossless. My personal website is 5GB.

Because every time you post a photo "compressed" with PNG, an OC poster dies.

Don't kill OC, user. Use JPEG for photos.

>faster upstream than downstream
neat

>implying there are other options where I live.
Even if I was not poor, I have no options because capitalism has failed.
Welcome to hell.

>implying killing faggots is a bad thing
Have a random png

Attached: 66d.png (500x402, 387K)