>widely supported >low filesizes >lossless scaling

yeah sure just let me convert this raw photo to .svg

>>45440505
>>45440532
#rekt

>>45440505
It only works well for simple graphics, automatic conversion from raster (i.e. photo) to vector doesn't work well, and modern screens are raster-based tech.

>>45440591
>and modern screens are raster-based tech.
Showing svg as raster is easy
Showing raster as svg is hard

svg isn't an image format for one, it's a hypertext document.
Second, vectors are only good for certain types of images. Most images wouldn't work as a vector.

>>45440505
>>.SVG
>embedded javascript

Yeah no thanks.

File: r_QRuIuh_Iw.jpg (90KB, 600x433px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 600x433px

>>45440532
>photo
>vector
Sorry son, but you went complete retard.

>>45440621
Showing svg as raster is easy but computationally expensive compared to showing svg on vector systems like CRTs.

>>45440505
>Why isn't .svg more popular?
Because vector format is unsuitable for lots of images.

>>45440737

char* your_head;
your_head[-9000] = "The point";