This is pure politics. The AOM want proof of loyalty and shipping a competing image format threatens that loyalty pact.
It’s also incrementalism at its finest. “We already shipped av1, adding a single frame decode is minor overhead” is the likely rationale. But it misses the point that images are gazed at while video is moving and can get away with a lot of quality sins that you can’t with images. But worse is that av1 is full of optional features. Sure the client could implement it, but how can you know? Even the lauded animated avif is horribly broken across the ecosystem because of this optionality — and there isn’t any way to tell a priori if the browser can support animated avif. Or 444 avif. Or ycocg avif. It’s just down right broken as an image format falling to the lowest common denominator.
5.25" floppy disks are more likely to suffer physical damage at this point in history than a 3.5" disk. This would also contribute to the supply-demand curve biasing to 3.5" (on top of the ubiquity argument)
3.5" have a more durable design - the hard plastic, the spring loaded shield and, most importantly, the center disk that rested on the enclosure housing that prevented the magnetic medium from sagging.
When 5.25" disks are stored on end, they sag over time causing them to physically be unreadable. You have to store them flat. 3.5" are (mostly) resistant to this sag and therefore will be more likely to survive long term.
HTTP caches were always problematic from a business perspective. Great for downloading large binaries (installs) but problematic when they don’t expire as expected, or if content needs to change for contractual reasons.
CDNs are a known commodity with business relationships. You can’t have an unknown CDN in the mix. They are an extension of your infrastructure and you can control if they are or aren’t in the path of control. They key here is that there is also a legal and business relationship.
Yea, but the web server delivering them is now google. Google now gets the access logs and using the persistent tls socket can follow the users activity. Sure the content is signed, but the delivery is no longer private.
Let’s call a spade a spade. The only real world problem that WebBundles (and Signed Exchanges) really solve is to allow AMP to impersonate your website.
Google wants all the click data and the click through navigation data about users (by way of passive logs) so they can sell more ads.
There are no other real world problems that web bundles solve.
It’s also incrementalism at its finest. “We already shipped av1, adding a single frame decode is minor overhead” is the likely rationale. But it misses the point that images are gazed at while video is moving and can get away with a lot of quality sins that you can’t with images. But worse is that av1 is full of optional features. Sure the client could implement it, but how can you know? Even the lauded animated avif is horribly broken across the ecosystem because of this optionality — and there isn’t any way to tell a priori if the browser can support animated avif. Or 444 avif. Or ycocg avif. It’s just down right broken as an image format falling to the lowest common denominator.