Google May Reconsider JPEG-XL Image Support Within Chrome

[phoronix]

Phoronix: Google May Reconsider JPEG-XL Image Support Within Chrome

Last year Google decided to deprecate JPEG-XL image support within their Chrome/Chromium web browser. They expressed not enough interest and other factors for so quickly removing JPEG-XL support from their browser. They went ahead and removed the support for this next-gen JPEG standard while now a half-year later they may be having second thoughts...

https://www.phoronix.com/news/Chrome-JPEG-XL-Seconds

[Myownfriend]

Great news and it will be even better if they choose to actually support it. Ever since I heard that you can convert Jpegs to Jpeg-XL at the same quality but at a smaller size, I thought it would be a huge mistake for browsers not to support it. The potential for websites to eventually automatically convert their old Jpegs they're hosting to JXL to save space and bandwidth would be huge. It could make the Internets storage footprint smaller without really removing anything.

[avis]

"Thanks, Apple".

FTFY, Google.

If it weren't for the Cupertino company's decision to outplay you on the image codecs field, you'd have not moved your arse.

Which also shows that monopolies and very large companies are extremely bad for the consumer.

Now it would be great to split Chrome into two separate projects, one of which is wholly independent from the advertising company, but I don't see it happening unless governments step in.

[Ananace]

It's good to see that Google haven't quite gotten big enough to be able to shit all over their users without repercussions just yet.
Been hoping for jpeg-xl support to spread enough that websites start using it for a while now, actually having an image format with proper progressive decode will be huge for a large amount of internet users.

[andyprough]

Too late - everyone in the world has already switched to using Waterfox and Thorium and Pale Moon for their jpeg-xl support, and Chrome's market share has dropped to 0.01% worldwide. You're not allowed onboard this train Google.

[DKenn]

I think Google is too invested in WebP to consider other, possibly better, formats!

[gnattu]

"Thanks, Apple".

FTFY, Google.

If it weren't for the Cupertino company's decision to outplay you on the image codecs field, you'd have not moved your arse.

Which also shows that monopolies and very large companies are extremely bad for the consumer.

Now it would be great to split Chrome into two separate projects, one of which is wholly independent from the advertising company, but I don't see it happening unless governments step in.

Do you know that they are trying to add DRM-like mechanisms to all websites? But someone told me that this feature is not going to be shipped in the shape described in this proposal, which is good news. Apple still has some power to change the direction of the web because they are enforcing webkit to be the only engine allowed on iOS, and iOS user-base is too huge to be ignored. But now EU has stepped in trying to force apple to open up this restriction, and the worst case would be webkit is just gone and blink becomes the de facto "standard" of the browser and anything google chose to not support would get kicked out of the internet.

[Mario Junior]

Google BTFO! 🤣

Now they can shove that shitty webp up their own asses!

[hf_139]

Thanks Apple and Adobe.
Thanks firefox for "reconsidering" their neutral stance (even thought nothing went of that yet).
Thanks to KDE and GNOME for implementing it.

JPEG XL is an awesome format, you can transcode jpeg into jpeg-xl without decoding / encoding losses.
You can convert pngs into lossless jpeg-xl. All your existing images can be converted, will be much smaller, and you will have lost nothing.
I compiled firefox stable with jpeg-xl support, just because.

Meanwhile its only competitor, AVIF, has less features and is only better at extremely lossy compression.

[Quackdoc]

any joy is still premature, the change doesn't really mean anything