Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've said "jif" for almost 40 years, and I'm not stopping anytime soon. Hard-g is wrong , and those who use it are showing they have zero respect for others when they don't have to. It's the tech equivalent to the shopping cart problem. What do you do when there is no incentive one way or the other? Do you do the right thing, or do you disrespect others?
Is this a bit?
A new PNG spec
281–290 of 622 posts
Re: A new PNG spec
#282Earlier quoted context omitted.
> and the abysmal everyday use it gets Estimates are that 95% of Internet users have a browser that supports WebP and that ~25% of the top million websites serve WebP images. I wouldn't call that abysmal.
completely fails the second you want to do anything more than load it on a webpage Photoshop still won’t open it, MacOS preview opens it but then demands to convert it to tiff when you try to edit it
Re: A new PNG spec
#283Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which makes sense for an app made for photos: why would you capture a photograph to disk in a format made for distributing on the web?
Instagram hasn't even been primarily or even secondarily about photos for a long time. Indeed trying to "just" upload a photo is made super inconvenient these days.
Re: A new PNG spec
#284Earlier quoted context omitted.
> there is no way for a user to tell from the look of the port or the file extension what the capabilities are But that's typical for file extensions. Consider EXE – it is probably an executable, but an executable for what? Most commonly Windows – but which Windows version will this EXE run on? Maybe this EXE only works on Windows 11, and you are still running Windows 10. Or maybe you are running x86-64 Windows, but…
> Consider EXE – it is probably an executable, but an executable for what? Most commonly Windows Has anyone ever used .exe for anything other than Windows?
Re: A new PNG spec
#285> I know you all immediately wondered, better compression?. We're already working on that. This worries me. Because presumably, changing the compression algorithm will break backwards compatibility, which means we'll start to see "png" files that aren't actually png files. It'll be like USB-C but for images.
Old PNGs will work just fine. And forward compatibility is much less important. The main use case for PNG is web browsers and all of them seem to be on board. Using old web browsers is a bad idea. You do get these relics showing up using some old version of internet explorer. But some images not rendering is the least of their problems. The main challenge is actually going to be updating graphics tools to export the…
It's not, most images you encounter on the web need better compression.
The main PNG use case is to store lossless images locally as master copies that are then compressed or in workflows where you intend to edit and change them where compressed formats would degrade the more they were edited.
Re: A new PNG spec
#286Earlier quoted context omitted.
One interesting thing about JPEG is that you can rotate an image with no quality loss. You don't need to convert each 8x8 square to pixels, rotate and convert back, instead you can transform them in the encoded form. So, rotating each 8x8 square is easy, and then rotating the image is just re-ordering the rotated squares.
That doesn't seem to apply to images that aren't multiples of 8 in size, does it?
Re: A new PNG spec
#287Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because the creator of gifs telling the world how he pronounced it made such a huge difference :) Not sure I'll bother to reprogram myself from “png”, “pung”, or “pee-enn-gee”.
When someone makes a baby, you call that person by their real name with the correct pronunciation, don’t you? So why can’t you do that with GIF or PNG? People that create things get to name them.
Re: A new PNG spec
#288Somebody needs to manage human time/date approximates in a way other people in s/w will align to. "photo scanned in 2025, is about something in easter, before 1940 and after 1920"
The issue that gets me is that Google Photos and Apple photos will let you manually pick a date, but they won't actually set it in the photo EXIF, so when you move platforms. All of the images that came from scans/sent without EXIF lose their dates.
Re: A new PNG spec
#289Earlier quoted context omitted.
Linguistic prescriptivism is wrong , and people who promote it are showing they have zero respect for others when they don't have to.
I agree that language is fluid. However, when it comes to names, I think people should have enough respect to pronounce things how the creator (or owner, depending on the situation) of the name says it should be pronounced. Too often people will mispronounce someone's name as a sign of intentional disrespect (see Kamala Harris for a fairly recent prominent example) and I cannot get behind that. You see a similar disr…
Re: A new PNG spec
#290Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's poor, only because Google is using their stranglehold on browsers, to push their own WebP trash. That company can't get broken up soon enough.
Firefox also doesn’t support JPEG XL out of the box, and Chrome does support the new PNG, so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯.