this post was submitted on 24 Jun 2025
259 points (99.6% liked)
Programming
21163 readers
93 users here now
Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!
Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.
Hope you enjoy the instance!
Rules
Rules
- Follow the programming.dev instance rules
- Keep content related to programming in some way
- If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos
Wormhole
Follow the wormhole through a path of communities !webdev@programming.dev
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
WebP had been kind of moving in on its turf, based on what I've been seeing websites using.
I've never heard of webP. Looked it up. Not impressed. Sticking with png.
Who would want to use a format named web-pee
Web-pee is stored in the web-balls
The main advantage of webp is that it has good lossy compression, which makes it great for websites that show tens or hundreds of images on a single page
I always used PNG where I would have used GIF. Other than that I use JPG still. I'm guessing webp is more on the JPG side of things than the GIF side?
It can do both, lossiness is toggleable.
If you've seen a picture on Lemmy, you've almost certainly seen a WebP. A fair bit of software – most egregiously from Microsoft – refuses to decode them still, but every major browser has supported WebP for years and since superior data efficiency compared to JPG/PNG means is already very widely used on the web. Bandwidth is not that cheap.