[MrDOS]

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44298656

You might be getting 100 Mbps to your smartphone; many people – yes, even within the United States – struggle to attain a quarter of that.

[bob1029]

What is the likelihood of experiencing precisely marginal network conditions wherein webp improves the user experience so dramatically over jpeg that the user is able to notice?

If jpeg is loading like ass, webp probably isn't going to arrive much faster.

[MrDOS]

I'm sorry, I misunderstood your doubt of the usefulness of other lossy formats as criticism of using lossy formats in general in the face of higher bandwidth. Reading too fast, never mind me... :)

[GuB-42]

If you have slow internet on your smartphone, chances are that you also have a slow smartphone, and therefore decoding performance matter, it may also save you a bit of battery life for the same reason, which may be important in place with little internet coverage.

You have to find a balance, and unless (still) pictures are at the center of what you are doing, it is typically only a fraction of the bandwidth (and a fraction of the processing power too).

We are not talking about 100 Mbps, we downloaded JPEGs from dialup connections you know. You don't even need to go into the Mbps unless you are streaming MJPEG (and why would you do that?).

[tossaway0]

25Mbps is extremely fast in relation to the benefits when browsing the web of better image compression options than JPEG.