The community members discuss the lack of JPEG XL support, which is a newer image format that is better than AVIF and WebP. They note that Cloudflare, a major CDN provider, has not yet implemented JPEG XL support, while some other CDNs have. The reason appears to be that JPEG XL compresses images too well, which would reduce revenue for CDN providers that charge based on bandwidth usage. The community members discuss how pricing models based on page views rather than bandwidth would better incentivize CDN providers to adopt newer, more efficient image formats like JPEG XL.
It's odd cloudflare hasn't added it. Cloudinary and a few others CDNs have. I know it's over 25% of images delivered when it's turned on since it's supported on Mac/iOS/Safari.
Funny story on why the CDNs aren't moving faster. The question was "Why don't you CDN provider, turn it on by default:"
To be honest: currently it only gets enabled on new customers or existing ones that switch to our new pricing model that is impression-based instead of bandwidth-based. Basically in our old pricing model, if we do our job and compress well, we shoot ourselves in the foot since our revenue will drop, since we effectively charge for bandwidth consumption. The new pricing model fixes that, so incentives are better aligned. But we cannot just instantly move every customer to the new pricing model, existing contracts have to be respected and for the bigger ones those can be multi-year contracts. TL;DR: the reason jxl is not yet fully rolled out is that it compresses too good
LOL I feel so smart right now, because I said from the very beginning for webstudio that our metric should be page views, not bandwidth, otherwise we are not incentivised to optimize sites to save the bandwidth
I got tons of shit for this, because apparently many people don't know how many page views they are going to need and so they don't know what our pricing means
