<p>It has bugged me for a long time, why no successors have come to replace JPEG and anim GIF or PNG per say. I am completely a media format newbie, just started digging into the topic.</p>

<p>Roughly a year ago I come across <a href="http://bellard.org/bpg/" rel="nofollow">BPG</a> which seemed very nice to me and hoped it would gain some traction. However, just recently I discovered <a href="https://nokiatech.github.io/heif/" rel="nofollow">HEIF</a> and I am amazed how this has been published roughly a year ago and there is zero publicity and adoption, even though it seems like the next best thing after ice cream!</p>

<p>It is built mostly on other standard stuff, already widely adopted. It's just a very smart container. Could someone tell me why HEIF is not a thing?</p>

<p><strong>Edit question:</strong> does anyone know of any image formats, that uses HEVC for image compression and at least one semi-available application that makes use of it?</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-08-13T13:34:20.743Z
Chicken and egg conundrum. There would have to be some new application, ideally a faddish one, that can't perform passably with current image formats and hence catalyze the ecosystem to support HEIF or BPG. JPEG is entrenched and passable. As are GIFs. Although animated GIFs look ripe for replacement.
Gyan
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-08-16T15:35:26.963Z
While I'm as keen as you are to see this adopted, this immediately springs to mind: https://xkcd.com/927/
stib
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-08-17T20:11:28.973Z
Yeah, I was aware of that comic. I guess it's hard to get a format widely adopted, but I'd guess it would be in the interest of content service providers (Facebook, Instagram, Tumblr, 9gag, etc.) to adopt one if it means the can cut their bandwidth 3 fold.
Meteorhead
CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-03-29T08:40:39.490Z
The newer formats aren't strictly better. They make different tradeoffs. More gpu/cpu cycles and ram to encode and decode the images to make them smaller. It's the same reason we gzip web payloads not lzma. Even the big guys like Meta and Google pay more for gpu/cpu/ram than bandwidth. They have uses in certain pipelines, but not for the general web. Mng was a great format, but no one used it on the general web because at some point IE existed. So no "killer app" use case and it was different not better.
majinnaibu
<file-formats><mpeg><h.265>
Next-gen containers and codecs (BPG, HEIF, etc.)
Meteorhead
# Next-gen containers and codecs (BPG, HEIF, etc.)

(Asked by: username_0 on 2016-08-13)

It has bugged me for a long time, why no successors have come to replace JPEG and anim GIF or PNG per say. I am completely a media format newbie, just started digging into the topic.

Roughly a year ago I come across [BPG](http://bellard.org/bpg/) which seemed very nice to me and hoped it would gain some traction. However, just recently I discovered [HEIF](https://nokiatech.github.io/heif/) and I am amazed how this has been published roughly a year ago and there is zero publicity and adoption, even though it seems like the next best thing after ice cream!

It is built mostly on other standard stuff, already widely adopted. It's just a very smart container. Could someone tell me why HEIF is not a thing?

**Edit question:** does anyone know of any image formats, that uses HEVC for image compression and at least one semi-available application that makes use of it?

**Tags:** file-formats, mpeg, h.265

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Chicken and egg conundrum. There would have to be some new application, ideally a faddish one, that can't perform passably with current image formats and hence catalyze the ecosystem to support HEIF or BPG. JPEG is entrenched and passable. As are GIFs. Although animated GIFs look ripe for replacement.  
> **username_2**: While I'm as keen as you are to see this adopted, this immediately springs to mind: https://xkcd.com/927/  
> **username_0**: Yeah, I was aware of that comic. I guess it's hard to get a format widely adopted, but I'd guess it would be in the interest of content service providers (Facebook, Instagram, Tumblr, 9gag, etc.) to adopt one if it means the can cut their bandwidth 3 fold.  
> **username_3**: The newer formats aren't strictly better. They make different tradeoffs. More gpu/cpu cycles and ram to encode and decode the images to make them smaller. It's the same reason we gzip web payloads not lzma. Even the big guys like Meta and Google pay more for gpu/cpu/ram than bandwidth. They have uses in certain pipelines, but not for the general web. Mng was a great format, but no one used it on the general web because at some point IE existed. So no "killer app" use case and it was different not better.  

---

## 0 answers

