system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
ELI5: Why didn't vector graphic become mainstream rather than raster/pixel?

This is not exactly a PNG vs EPS argument. I've been working as a designer since four years now and since I work in print, the pixel data available on the net doesn't help much. I find myself converting stuff to vectors a lot of time. Apart from photos, everything else that could be vectorized is converted in my work. You can zoom in a million times and it still won't tear as it is not a matrix rather lines of equations to plot on an artboard. It is also way smaller than its pixel counterpart. Can someone explain why this didn't take off?
gpt
The hardware that will ultimately display or print your work is pixel-based. This means that any vector-based solution requires additional processing before it can be used.

This can also mean additional storage/transmission costs. Consider a CGI animated film. Handling it in pixel-based formed is somewhat expensive in terms of storage/transmission/processing. But it's completely prohibitive if you're working vector-based - you'd need a server farm and dedicated fiber to get anywhere near real-time.