6 ms·

It would be a lot better of an analysis if it would be compared to webp and co. Obviously is jpeg XL better than jpeg. It's just that the support is shit

illiac786 2y ago
It’s getting better, and this trend has seriously accelerated in the last months – my anecdotal observations. libvips has now good support for jxl, it has (since 8.16) support for EXIF data in jxl files as well. All FOSS projects can now use this to kickstart their jxl support. In the corporate world, well, we’re all waiting for Google (Chrome) and microsoft (Windows) basically. I think the rest is on board, Apple, Adobe, etc.
- BlackFingolfin 2y ago
  Chrome removed support for JPEG XL last year, see e.g. https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2023/04/free-software-group-decries-google-dropping-space-saving-jpeg-xl-format/ https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2023/04/free-software-group-...
  - illiac786 2y ago
    Sept. 3rd: > the team at Google has agreed to apply their subject matter expertise to build a safe, performant, compact, and compatible JPEG-XL decoder in Rust https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/pull/1064 https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/pull/1064
    - thisislife2 2y ago
      Shame that Mozilla is giving in to Google. It just looks like a delaying tactic - they don't want JPEG-XL to become popular because once JPEG-XL reaches a particular threshold of adoption, other similar encoding formats won't be able to compete with it.
      - illiac786 2y ago
        I agree on the “shame” part, also I do not get why it has to be yet another encode, there already is one Rust even, jxl-oxide. Why not take this one and expand it or improve it?… On the delaying tactic, you might be right, I want to be cautiously optimistic =)
thisislife2 2y ago
The support is shit only because of Google, Microsoft and Mozilla who refuse to add it to their OS / browser for their own selfish reasons. The tactic seems to be to just deliberately delay implementation to ensure JPEG-XL does not become popular. Now that Apple has adopted and deployed it on their OS platforms, hopefully others will feel the pressure to adopt it as JPEG-XL's user-base increases.
- thmsths 2y ago
  I can see why Google would drag their feet because they made the competing webp standard, I am not too surprised to see Microsoft on the list either. But I don't understand why Mozilla is choosing to be difficult here?

illiac786 2y ago

It’s getting better, and this trend has seriously accelerated in the last months – my anecdotal observations. libvips has now good support for jxl, it has (since 8.16) support for EXIF data in jxl files as well. All FOSS projects can now use this to kickstart their jxl support. In the corporate world, well, we’re all waiting for Google (Chrome) and microsoft (Windows) basically. I think the rest is on board, Apple, Adobe, etc.

BlackFingolfin 2y ago
Chrome removed support for JPEG XL last year, see e.g. https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2023/04/free-software-group-decries-google-dropping-space-saving-jpeg-xl-format/ https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2023/04/free-software-group-...
- illiac786 2y ago
  Sept. 3rd: > the team at Google has agreed to apply their subject matter expertise to build a safe, performant, compact, and compatible JPEG-XL decoder in Rust https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/pull/1064 https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/pull/1064
  - thisislife2 2y ago
    Shame that Mozilla is giving in to Google. It just looks like a delaying tactic - they don't want JPEG-XL to become popular because once JPEG-XL reaches a particular threshold of adoption, other similar encoding formats won't be able to compete with it.
    - illiac786 2y ago
      I agree on the “shame” part, also I do not get why it has to be yet another encode, there already is one Rust even, jxl-oxide. Why not take this one and expand it or improve it?… On the delaying tactic, you might be right, I want to be cautiously optimistic =)

thisislife2 2y ago

The support is shit only because of Google, Microsoft and Mozilla who refuse to add it to their OS / browser for their own selfish reasons. The tactic seems to be to just deliberately delay implementation to ensure JPEG-XL does not become popular. Now that Apple has adopted and deployed it on their OS platforms, hopefully others will feel the pressure to adopt it as JPEG-XL's user-base increases.

thmsths 2y ago
I can see why Google would drag their feet because they made the competing webp standard, I am not too surprised to see Microsoft on the list either. But I don't understand why Mozilla is choosing to be difficult here?