Google's Jpegli Offers ~35% Compression Improvement For High Quality JPEGs

[Old Grouch]

For that you'd need to have that power. Google does have that power, still everything they do is going through the long standardization processes.

Really? How many percent of the browser usage statistics does Chrome have? Chrome (like IE before it) is effectively the standard, whatever Google choose to include in it or not. Manifest V3, for example.

QUICK. It was a great idea bringing a massive security boost, yet it was extremely water

I have no idea what this is meant to mean. "QUICK was extremely water."?

[Artim]

Really? How many percent of the browser usage statistics does Chrome have? Chrome (like IE before it) is effectively the standard, whatever Google choose to include in it or not. Manifest V3, for example.

Exactly. Still, they may implement a lot of expermiental and not standardized stuff in Chrome/Chromium, yet it's all off by default and hidden behind flags. All big changes go through the W3C. So their power at that consortium is the relevant number.

I have no idea what this is meant to mean. "QUICK was extremely water."?

Not that hard to find out. HTTP/2 standard can easily be found and read by anybody. And you can also very easily find the history of QUIC including all the RFCs. But I think the largest point about QUICK originally was that encryption was supposed to be mandatory, not optional. This, besides lost of other things have been removed, so only very few technological progess has made its way into HTTP/2 given what could have been.

[Phoronos]

PNG doesn't offer any good lossy tech, and its on average larger on JXL for lossless, even when comparing ECTd pngs.
so it doesn't even compete with jpegli, and competes poorly for efficiency with jxl

ok do you know better alternatives than JPEG ??

[Artim]

ok do you know better alternatives than JPEG ??

WebP, AVIF, JXL. Depending on your use case. JPEG is simply not meant to be lossless. So the question is if you really need any other alternatives. Storage is getting cheaper by the day, bandwidth limitations are also much higher than they used to.

Also, depending on the use case, don't go with raster graphics in the first place. Use svg and call it a day. They'll be much smaller in most cases to begin with and can be very easily compressed even further. Web support isn't as good as it should be - that website toolkits like Wordpress are making such a fuzz about them is just hilarious - but you can get them to work beautifully and they work at any size.

[EphemeralEft]

For that you'd need to have that power. Google does have that power, still everything they do is going through the long standardization processes. And by no means that is just getting accepted.

QUIC (no K, by the way) is actually a great example of Google' ability to circumvent standardization. They just added it to Chrome without any input from other organizations, and eventually ~60% of the traffic they saw was using QUIC. They chose to standardize it after that, but clearly they didn't need to in order to dominate.

[Old Grouch]

Exactly. Still, they may implement a lot of expermiental and not standardized stuff in Chrome/Chromium, yet it's all off by default and hidden behind flags. All big changes go through the W3C. So their power at that consortium is the relevant number.

Prezactly. Take-over of committees/committee stuffing is a well-known problem. See Microsoft and ISO 29500.

Not that hard to find out. HTTP/2 standard can easily be found and read by anybody. And you can also very easily find the history of QUIC including all the RFCs. But I think the largest point about QUICK originally was that encryption was supposed to be mandatory, not optional. This, besides lost of other things have been removed, so only very few technological progess has made its way into HTTP/2 given what could have been.

Ahh - you mean 'watered down'.

[Radtraveller]

ok do you know better alternatives than JPEG ??

Jpeg2000, probably jpegxl-lossless. Lossy compression is mostly useless and niche my industry.
the fact remains, google tried to kill usage of jpeg-xl and they stripped down and changed a few things to come up with a “google” form.
yes it is on jpegxl, they coopted and took over to have a google created, supported, pushed, and branded “better jpegxl than jpegxl”..

not a new story with google.

[Artim]

QUIC (no K, by the way) is actually a great example of Google' ability to circumvent standardization. They just added it to Chrome without any input from other organizations, and eventually ~60% of the traffic they saw was using QUIC. They chose to standardize it after that, but clearly they didn't need to in order to dominate.

They didn't though. It was implemented as an experimental feature behind a flag. Off by default.

[Artim]

Prezactly. Take-over of committees/committee stuffing is a well-known problem. See Microsoft and ISO 29500.

With the difference that Google obviously doesn't do that, otherwise their proposals would be accepted without any changes.

Ahh - you mean 'watered down'.

Yes, Phoronix is having huge issues in the last days, not loading, being slow and generally sluggish. Maybe that was cut off.

[Artim]

Jpeg2000, probably jpegxl-lossless. Lossy compression is mostly useless and niche my industry.
the fact remains, google tried to kill usage of jpeg-xl and they stripped down and changed a few things to come up with a “google” form.
yes it is on jpegxl, they coopted and took over to have a google created, supported, pushed, and branded “better jpegxl than jpegxl”..

not a new story with google.

Please stop spreading lies that have been disproven several times already.