Most active commenters

    ←back to thread

    The JPEG XL Image Coding History, Features, Coding Tools, Design Rationale

    (arxiv.org)
    94 points ksec | 12 comments | 13 Jul 25 05:05 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source | bottom
    Show context
    ekunazanu ◴[15 Jul 25 11:29 UTC] No.44570052[source]▶
    JPEG XL had so much going for it. Kinda sad it was killed off just like that.
    replies(7): >>44570077 #>>44570161 #>>44570521 #>>44570580 #>>44570956 #>>44572410 #>>44575108 #
    1. MrAlex94 ◴[15 Jul 25 11:47 UTC] No.44570161[source]▶
    As it currently stands there should be over a billion devices that natively support JPEG-XL, as it was introduced in all Apple OSs since September 2023[1].

    On the web alone it should be close to a billion users with support for JXL due to Safari’s market share.

    [1]: https://cloudinary.com/blog/jpeg-xl-how-it-started-how-its-g...

    replies(1): >>44570272 #
    2. ndriscoll ◴[15 Jul 25 12:04 UTC] No.44570272[source]▶
    It's also supported in Windows, GNOME, KDE, pretty much all image editors/viewers, and pretty much every other relevant program except for chromium based browsers.
    replies(1): >>44570437 #
    3. account42 ◴[15 Jul 25 12:27 UTC] No.44570437[source]▶
    Not just Chromium-based browsers, Firefox as well. Might not make much of a difference for user counts but it does mean that so far it's available on the web is limited to a single vendor.
    replies(4): >>44570458 #>>44570622 #>>44570623 #>>44570649 #
    4. _bent ◴[15 Jul 25 12:29 UTC] No.44570458{3}[source]▶
    they did say "relevant". Though arguably Chromium will probably overthink their decision if both Safari and Firefox support it.
    5. ndriscoll ◴[15 Jul 25 12:52 UTC] No.44570622{3}[source]▶
    Firefox does support jxl (in the sense that the code is there and works), but it's disabled by default.
    replies(1): >>44572497 #
    6. kevincox ◴[15 Jul 25 12:52 UTC] No.44570623{3}[source]▶
    Firefox has it implemented (behind a preference on nightly). They just don't want to ship it if Chromium isn't going to because it would cause fragmentation in the web and something they have to maintain forever for a minority of sites (as most won't bother if Chromium based browsers don't support it).
    replies(3): >>44571016 #>>44571743 #>>44573484 #
    7. OneDeuxTriSeiGo ◴[15 Jul 25 12:55 UTC] No.44570649{3}[source]▶
    It's worth noting that it is "supported" in Firefox however it's not enabled at compile time for release builds (but is enabled for nightly and testing/validation builds).

    Full release/production support will come when the (more or less drop in replacement) rust rewrite of libjxl is production ready.

    replies(1): >>44570816 #
    8. throw0101c ◴[15 Jul 25 13:16 UTC] No.44570816{4}[source]▶
    > rust rewrite of libjxl

    See:

    * https://github.com/libjxl/jxl-rs

    9. OneDeuxTriSeiGo ◴[15 Jul 25 13:35 UTC] No.44571016{4}[source]▶
    Tbh it's less about having to maintain it forever and more about not wanting to deal with maintaining a C++ library codebase that would widen the potential attack surface of the browser (due to memory bugs, etc). They are fine adopting it as long as it's in rust (which is being worked on, see sibling comments)
    10. charcircuit ◴[15 Jul 25 14:51 UTC] No.44571743{4}[source]▶
    Considering firefox is a small fraction of safari's size I don't think it would fragment the web that much.
    11. account42 ◴[15 Jul 25 15:56 UTC] No.44572497{4}[source]▶
    So does Chrome if you check out the right commits and enable it.

    But if you go getfirefox.com, click "Download Firefox" then there will be no JXL support not even behind any configuration flags. So no, it doesn't support it. There are also no plans to enable support with the current implementation.

    12. greenavocado ◴[15 Jul 25 17:13 UTC] No.44573484{4}[source]▶
    The Mozilla "organizations" are a two-headed grift piggy-backed on a non-profit shell so the IRS keeps smiling.

    Firefox hasn't made a technical decision without first forwarding the minutes to Mountain View and Redmond since roughly 2017.

    Every nine-figure Google wire lands promptly converts into $450 k-per-head salary vapor and off-site "all-hands," while the same week another 250 actual engineers get an email that begins: "You're talented and valued BUT-."

    Servo? Jettisoned.

    MDN? Gutted.

    Security teams? Re-org'd into a Slack channel no one reads.

    And the Foundation helpfully reminds donors:

    "Your gifts don't pay for Firefox engineering."

    No kidding. They pay for glossy pamphlets proclaiming the open-web gospel, first-class flights to "advocacy summits," and Mitchell Baker's $2.5 million thank-you note. Firefox isn't a browser; it's a loss-leader Google keeps in the closet for the next antitrust subpoena.