Why won't Firefox and the other non-Chromium browsers s

>>57471372
>needs
Does it though? Does it really?

Firefox already supports APNG's, no need to implement yet another standard for animated images :^)

Because they're shit. Another thing firefox doesn't support is fast performance.

These tests were done on a Skylake Xeon, 16GB of RAM and a PCI-Express SSD. e10s enabled and dom.ipc.processCount set to 50. Now tell me Firefox isn't slow:

>FF vs Chrome - 30 Random sites
https://webmshare.com/play/KBm8v
>FF vs Chrome - 11 News sites
https://webmshare.com/play/Meo8O
>FF vs Chrome - 40+ Instagram profiles on Windows
https://webmshare.com/play/Wn1GD
>FF vs Chrome - 40+ Instagram profiles on Arch Linux
https://webmshare.com/play/6wK0n
>FF vs Chrome on bad machine (2core/2thread - 2GB RAM)
https://webmshare.com/play/gBdJb
>FF vs Chrome with uBlock
https://webmshare.com/play/RAE86

>Vivaldi vs Opera vs Chrome
https://webmshare.com/play/LX38L

>>57471413
>lossless animation

>>57471425
nigger pasta

Webp is shit.

File: 1469309230745.png (2MB, 1011x3032px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1011x3032px

>>57471456
>nigger pasta
How much is mozilla (tm) paying you?

>Webp is shit.
see pic related

>>57471378
This.

>>57471378
>>57471497
>what are faster loading times

File: 1464991435844-1.jpg (171KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

171KB, 1920x1080px

>>57471479
So, it would be useful for those who have dialup connections and don't mind shitty support and the blurry quality. Opera implemented it to save bandwidth, but i don't compress images to the shit.

>>57471513
If web developers wanted faster loading times they'd stop including javascript and other shit from tens of domains on every site.

File: 1458460221576.gif (2MB, 320x180px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 320x180px

>>57471528
>>57471532
>I have a 1Gbps internet connection
>therefore every website serves me content at 1Gbps

>>57471599
Welcome in the age of 4K videos.

>>57471372
stop making formats
stop making standards

we have enough you assholes

>>57471372
we live in a age where people screenshot pics on their phone they want to save, instead of actually saving them.

I'd say we're doing just fine.

Firefox is working on implementing WebP
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=856375

>>57471372
Because patent laws. No one is sure WebP is actually legal.

>>57471655
>PNG supports transparency but isn't lossy
>JPEG is lossy but doesn't support transparency

>>57471372
qutebrowser supports webp

>>57471680
Then why is ebay already using it?

>>57471684
>neither support animation

>>57471680
I think you are _seriously_ confused. WebP is basically VP8 which is a fully free codec.

Maybe you're mistaking WebP for BPG (which is based on HEVC and thus requires you to pay HEVC royalties to use)?

>>57471723
WebP does. :)

https://mathiasbynens.be/demo/animated-webp

>>57471372
firefox with default settings loads MP4 not webm vids, and if you change the default settings in about:confing you'll get some videos that keep loading forever, that crash and give you a player error
FUCK THIS SHITTY BROWSER!

>>57471744
that's my point

>>57471679
>Firefox is working
ON MAKING ANOTHER SHIT VERSION<<<<chrome

>>57471744
If apng could make it, fucking google shit shouldn't either.

>>57472209
apng was an extremely shitty hack onto an outdated format

animated webp is much better conceptually

>>57471479
isn't her neck a little to big?

>>57471479
you had to show everybody you're a weeb...

>>57472359
hello pajeet, are you lost?

>>57472325
Be just.
http://littlesvr.ca/apng/gif_apng_webp4.html

There is no royalty fee on jpg, gif or png. Pointless to introduce new format even if they are "superior".

>>57472377
HAHAHA!!

The answer is GIF.

gif supports lossy and transparency

And it's also pronounced with a soft 'g' like Jif, and /g/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AOMedia_Video_1

>Using outdated VP8 WEBP
>any year

OP IS A FAGGOT

>>57471372
Nobody gives a shit about it, the pipes are only getting bigger and you'd sure as fuck be hard-pressed to find hardware that has difficulty coping with existing standards. WebM actually had noticeable advantages over GIF, WebP on the other hand brings very little compelling ideas to the table other than stroking off a few masturbating efficiency idealists who probably also cry like a brown millennial on 11/9 over a couple megabytes of RAM in their loaded surplus workstations and gaming shitboxes.

But strawmen aside, maybe it would have a chance if mainstream operating systems integrated better support for it into their file managers, for example, but there's no reason for that to happen at this time.

>>57472209
mng could have made it because Netscape plugins worked on every browser, it just had 0% advertising

ITT: luddites who want to kill 4chan

File: 1477551235626.png (401KB, 1134x595px) Image search: [Google]

401KB, 1134x595px

Because flif is better
BETTER

>>57472983
>0 support
>still in alpha development
>like 5% better than webp which has like 70% browser support and can easily give winblows codec support
k

File: graph.png (4KB, 340x150px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 340x150px

>>57472641
It doesn't help that traffic is constantly increasing on 4chan (most likely due to /pol/).

Used to doubt hiroshima but traffic really has gotten pretty fucking heavy.

>>57471528
it would be useful to website operators to lower their outgoing bandwidth costs
like, it's actually a big deal when you're high-volume

disk space isn't the issue

trying to do copy/paste it freezes like the motherfucker is about to die

>>57471372
>Why won't Firefox and the other non-Chromium browsers support WebP?
>https://developers.google.com
That's the problem.
It's like asking why no one browser except of IE supported ActiveX.