If nobody would care, then how do you explain all the effort that went into MozJPEG, WebP, BPG, FLIF, HEIC, AVIF and JPEG XL?

Do you really think people are working on improved image compression just for fun, and not because "somebody actually cares"?

Also, it is not just about compression, it is also about functionality. HDR displays are a thing, images with alpha transparency are also a thing. There just is no way to properly do HDR and alpha without "dealing with the hassle of using a non-standard image format", unless you think 16-bit PNGs are a good idea for the web.

Neat... But the only image on this page (the logo) is still a gif, an image format from 33 years ago, without any updates for 32 years.

Sure, if you don't need images, then that's fine and you obviously don't need a new codec. There is a significant chunk of the web though that does make significant use of images.

I would not call JPEG2000 being "barely used" - it is the standard format for all digital cinema movie packages.

Its also heavily used in the medical imaging field for radiographs etc

also for aerial photography images.

What is a digital cinema movie package?

To simplify its a tar with jpeg2000s as an image stream, plus audio and some metadata.

Its then (usually, but it is optional) encrypted to make sure that its hard to copy. The keys are sent directly to each projector to allow time limited, and or other limited use.

The reason why its used is because it optimized for quality, rather than size. It also allows custom colour spaces and other tweaks to maintain/enforce colour correctness/image quality.

Cinemas don't use consumer grave video compression like h265, instead each frame is a jpeg 2000 image. It's heavy.

The data format used to send movies to cinemas.

So just halt innovation because a fraction of the internet's users have fast connection speeds?

> So just halt innovation because a fraction of the internet's users have fast connection speeds?

Inovation ? Will it make life easier for people ? No. You still need to update. Will the page load faster ? No page still has 30 Mb at 50 kbps. Lossless ? Same as PNG. Lossy - same as JPG. So what is the inovation ? That with 20 threads on an Epyc is very fast ? How about my 1ghz phone with 4 cores ?

Lots of users in the world are still on 2G/3G and would greatly benefit from a faster image format.

> Lossless ? Same as PNG. Lossy - same as JPG.

This is incorrect, JPEG XL is smaller.

Also why do you put spaces before your question marks? It makes your post look rushed.