[jws]

That is to save 146KB on one image an 99KB on another, to save 2 seconds you'd have to using a 1mbps connection.

The first random internet article I pulled for real world cellular speeds suggests even unwired, people are getting 30mbps so that changes the article to:

Apple could load 66ms faster by adopting WebP

… but these are cached resources, so maybe…

Apple could perform the initial load 66ms faster by adopting WebP

… would be better.

Looking at the assets needed for an initial load, the fonts alone weigh in at about twice those images, so it probably wouldn't be noticeable.

[xrisk]

1) “real world” cellular speeds at 30mbps? That sounds ludicrous to me. Maybe in America, definitely not in many countries across the world.

2) I don’t know a lot of people who are repeat visitors to apple.com. Mentioning the fact that the time is initial load time would be redundant.

[thomaslord]

> Maybe in America I'd say maybe outside America. Our cell service is pretty terrible if you leave major metropolitan areas, or if you try to actually use your "unlimited" data.

[LyndsySimon]

It’s inconsistent.

I live in rural Arkansas, and typical get about 50Mpbs via LTE in a hammock on the shore of the lake.

[toast0]

The speed of small transfers is going to be dominated by congestion window limiting, not bandwidth. So round trip time matters more than bandwidth.

All that said, Apple primarily cares about existing Apple users at this point, why would they optimize images for non-Apple users? They're much more likely to push HEIC if they care --- which for 250kB of images in the modern web, I kind of don't think they would.

[m463]

The other question is -- how does it affect battery life? New codecs usually take more CPU.

[Flimm]

I think there are more images than just the first two shown in the cropped screenshot.

[jccalhoun]

i just checked and according to speedtest.net, here in Indiana, I have 12. 29mbps down.