Firefox 108 Now Available With WebMIDI, Import Maps Enabled By Default

[arun54321]

Already done - look for the setting image.jxl.enabled - it exists in FF 107.

https://jpegxl.io/tutorials/firefox/

Needs decoder: https://github.com/libjxl/libjxl
Package is available for openSUSE Tumbleweed, officially isn't available for openSUSE Leap.

Afaik it works only on Firefox nightly

[Quackdoc]

If Firefox is going to be the only browser with support for Jpeg-xl.. then you might want to consider this image format dead as well.

not true, websites will use any feature availible to be better, then fall back for unsupported browser, just take a look at apng

Already done - look for the setting image.jxl.enabled - it exists in FF 107.

https://jpegxl.io/tutorials/firefox/

Needs decoder: https://github.com/libjxl/libjxl
Package is available for openSUSE Tumbleweed, officially isn't available for openSUSE Leap.

this is broken and missing plenty of good features, of which PRs have been sitting for over a year, JXL also only is enabled on dev builds

nobody cares about either.

pretty much every major company for web cares about JXL, even some google branches care about it as seen by google devs also asking for support in the chromium tracker

[direc85]

I think I have suffered about the hanging bug also, we'll soon see

I am a Firefox user, I do care! I tried Vivaldi for a year or so to keep the spirit of Opera alive, but since Chrome refuses to support GPU video decoding on Linux (to leverage Chromebooks, I guess?), I happily returned to Firefox. Vivaldi is great, but Firefox is just much more flexible and, well, RAM-friendly.

I'll try the multi account container plugin for sure, thanks for the tip!

[Hibbelharry]

not true, websites will use any feature availible to be better, then fall back for unsupported browser, just take a look at apng

No, not really. Implementing all that fallback stuff all the time... noone really does that. Especially not, if the current w3c aka Google Chrome developers dictate the standard. Whatever Chrome does is currently a rule set in stone.

In my eyes JPEGXL is deadbeef.

[Quackdoc]

No, not really. Implementing all that fallback stuff all the time... noone really does that. Especially not, if the current w3c aka Google Chrome developers dictate the standard. Whatever Chrome does is currently a rule set in stone.

absolute bull, most sites serving AVIF still fall back to PNG or JPEG

[Hibbelharry]

absolute bull, most sites serving AVIF still fall back to PNG or JPEG

I'm part of product management for a shopping cart software here in germany, with at least some 5 digit number of live instances doing business. In our product we do for example webp and fallback to jpeg and png if needed. Those are common formats, asked for by our customers and google.

We currently don't touch avif, because of no demand yet and the need of implementation of more new fallbacks because it's not supported on all browsers adding additional cost. For avif I see this possibly changing in the future, but not right now.

But as far as we are concerned, jpegxl is not worth the cost. There is even less customer demand, browser support is way worse then webp or avif. Additionally crawlers cant process jpegxl and fallbacks are always a danger to those succeeding to index a site, which is a very vital fact in decisions. Finally stacking fallbacks on top of fallbacks is a bad idea all the time.

So when I saw Google removing jpegxl from chrome i finally closed the lingering feature consideration ticket for good.

[Quackdoc]

I'm part of product management for a shopping cart software here in germany, with at least some 5 digit number of live instances doing business. In our product we do for example webp and fallback to jpeg and png if needed. Those are common formats, asked for by our customers and google.

We currently don't touch avif, because of no demand yet and the need of implementation of more new fallbacks because it's not supported on all browsers adding additional cost. For avif I see this possibly changing in the future, but not right now.

But as far as we are concerned, jpegxl is not worth the cost. There is even less customer demand, browser support is way worse then webp or avif. Additionally crawlers cant process jpegxl and fallbacks are always a danger to those succeeding to index a site, which is a very vital fact in decisions. Finally stacking fallbacks on top of fallbacks is a bad idea all the time.

So when I saw Google removing jpegxl from chrome i finally closed the lingering feature consideration ticket for good.

and? just because you guys won't doesn't mean hundreds of other services won't. not sure why you think your service is indicative of everyone, when it absolutely is not. shopify, not a small company for instance is already shipping JXL.

also don't mistake your customers for everyone, there are many large companies, including facebook asking for JXL support. even vesa and intel are asking for it, so while your customers don't ask for it, and is probably not suitable for you, does not mean that no company will implement fall back support for it when some already are.

no shit browser support for JXL is worse then avif or webp, no browser has implemented it yet. doesn't mean the format is dead or worthless.

if someone struggles to implement a fallback from JXL to webp or jpeg, that's not because it's a bad idea, it's because those devs are bafflingly incompetent.

[Hibbelharry]

and? just because you guys won't doesn't mean hundreds of other services won't. not sure why you think your service is indicative of everyone, when it absolutely is not. shopify, not a small company for instance is already shipping JXL.

I don't think our service is indicative of everyone but I wanted to give an example and background.

also don't mistake your customers for everyone, there are many large companies, including facebook asking for JXL support. even vesa and intel are asking for it, so while your customers don't ask for it, and is probably not suitable for you, does not mean that no company will implement fall back support for it when some already are.

You need more than some to lift a theoretical standard to a living standard. In fact you need most relevant parties.

no shit browser support for JXL is worse then avif or webp, no browser has implemented it yet. doesn't mean the format is dead or worthless.

If browsers don't implement the standard, then it's dead for web usage. Today chrome has by far the most marketshare and dictates standards. It simply doesn't matter what the w3c or facebook or shopify are thinking if people can not use it.

if someone struggles to implement a fallback from JXL to webp or jpeg, that's not because it's a bad idea, it's because those devs are bafflingly incompetent.

That's a hilarious answer. Don't answer when you're mad. Answer when you put some thoughts and real life consideration into it.

[Chrispynut]

On the off chance that others have been using vertical bookmarks which broke with Firefox 108 )perhaps using CSS from MrOtherGuy), update the userChrome.css code (which was updated on github in October) and they'll be working again (at least, this worked for me, I don't recall how long ago I updated the code).

[mystiquewolf]

For me Firefox Proton is the best interface of Firefox to date. Firefox has the best feature set and is the best browser for me. Bad things off it are slow bug-fixes, slow bug-handling and slow development.