Responsive Images?

Dave Rupert wrote:

Lots has happened in the world of Responsive Images since I wrote Mo’ Pixels, Mo’ Problems. And by lots, I mean nothing at all.

Yep. I think the W3C folks are trying to make everyone happy, but this can’t happen due to the complicated nature of images on the web. There needs to be some solution, and Tim Kadlec’s recent article hints at why:

What is staggering is just how massive the savings could be if these sites served appropriately sized images. At 360px wide, these 402 sites combine to serve 171.62MB of unnecessary weight to their visitors . That’s a whopping 72.2% of image weight that could be ditched by using a responsive image technique.

Pretty ridiculous. If the internet is for readers first, then something must be done to improve their experience.