Gnome developer creates new animated image format

This is not a "new animated image format", it's just using the capabilities of something that existed before.

In other words, it's basically MJPEG in an inefficient text-based container. Many browsers can already play back MJPEG streams (common with IP cameras), so I do not see the point of this other than as an "it can be done" exercise.

Also worth noting that animated SVG (vector format) is usually bigger than the equivalent SWF file - despite all the hate Flash gets (after the Adobe acquisition was when it seemed to get worse), I think it's a great compact vector animation format. You can also put MJPEG inside a SWF, so they're on equal footing with respect to that.

So is webp.

The author talks about lacking support for apng, but ironically apng has better support than his hack and is a superior format in every respects.

Any animation form that a) just uses a still image form (jpg) and b) base64 encodes the data is destined to be terrible. SVG support is also not significantly better than apng... in fact, taking arbitrary photo viewing applications I'd bet that animated svg would fall far below apng in support.

Calling this a new format is also very charitable since je did no work on improving the actual image compression algorithms. Google's WEBP/WEBM are examples of a new format that truly is pushing the boundaries. This, not so much.

This completely disregards anything motion estimation. Every single frame is encoded from scratch and that means a huge amount of space is wasted. And because of how JPEG works if even a single pixel is different in a macroblock you're throwing away most of the compressibility. Even GIF, GIF has the option of overlaying the previous GIF, which is how it's possible to get more than 256 colours in a GIF, among other net little tricks. GIF with even a small measure of dithering makes more sense than this, in all honesty. "GIFs, but better"? That's only because you're a) not using GIFs right and b) GIFs are terrible, but there's worse for the majority of use cases. This is one example.

It also means that the browser has to load every single frame of this. If you've got a minute long video with 15 frames per second, that's 900 JPEG images in base64 hopping around in memory. Which do you think a tablet would be better at? Playing a minute of H.264, hardware accelerated and all, or shuffling through 900 JPEG images, 15 a second for at least a minute? How about 60 fps and 15 seconds? MPEG has been invented for a reason. Motion estimation is a good thing and has been built into everything since the 90s. Including virtually all mobile browsers, through whatever codec. Sorry, but this at best solves only a UI problem. Something like gifv is a much, much better solution. Also, unless you have the JPEG quantiser set to a wasteful 100, you're going to see the maroblock boundaries sitting around there and cutting lines into the picture, each frame differently depending on the quantiser level. I wouldn't even call it a neat little hack - just check out the memory usage. And don't even get me started on the name - XNG.

Using canvas with JavaScript to render something akin to simple MPEG - that would be cool, amazing, brilliant. Finding a way to optimise dithering patterns within a GIF to minimise frame sizes would be absolutely fascinating. This is terrible.

This is not a format problem. Hell, storing a movie in three different actual formats next to each other to get browser support for everything would waste less space than a single file of this. This is a UI problem at worst.

If you want to use SVG for animations, go nuts. By all means. But never use it for anything like what I'm seeing here - actual videos instead of animations.

The only use I can see for XNG that leaves it at least an order of magnitude as good as something else is if each frame shares almost nothing in common with the previous frame and is a full actual picture. But even then MPEG-1 with every frame a keyframe would do about just as well. gfycat and gifv are perfectly fine and superior on almost every level (apart from maybe the UI on esoteric devices x y or z that also somehow have a fast processor and a lot of RAM) than this.

tl;dr: 60% CPU usage and a memory leak pushing my Chrome past a GB and that's just the start of it.

How do I load an h.264 video in markdown? bbcode? Filtered html? I can't. But anything that lives in an img tag? That just works.

JPEG, PNG, 24bits, 8bits, you pick what works best for you. This is brilliant.

Not rendering on Safari 8 though.

1. APNG for low-color/lossless content.

2. MP4/WebM for video-like content.

3. ???

4. No more GIFs = Profit.

Despite all its shortcomings, it's hard to ignore the fact it works, right out of the box.