Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

macOS 14 will support JPEG XL

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 123 posts

Re: macOS 14 will support JPEG XL

#41

Post by asddubs »

derefr wrote: post #34
jez wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I sincerely hope this might make Chrome change its mind. I take this to suggest that Chrome actively decided against implementing JPEG XL? Did they consider supporting it and reject support for it, or has it simply not been prioritized, but still might be prioritized one day? If the decision was intentional: did they state a reason why?

They did all the work required to implement it, sat around for a few months, and then removed it , before anyone else even noticed it was there / had a chance to start integrating it. My personal conspiracy theory is that some Google engineer who works on Chrome, came up with "JPEG XL support" as a feature they could work on, pushed it through to prod, patted themselves on the back, and forgot about it; but this was…

it was also only ever hidden behind a flag

Re: macOS 14 will support JPEG XL

#42

Post by lucideer »

PaulHoule wrote: post #5
amoerie wrote: post #2

As a radiology software developer: please please let JPEG XL become a thing. I sincerely hope this might make Chrome change its mind. JPEG XL is a game changer for 16 bit lossless images. The technical landscape for these kinds of images today is barren.

As a mirrorless photographer who wants to publish photos on the web that look like they came out of a mirrorless camera I want JPEG XL. In trials I've done, AVIF works well for a throwaway splash image for a blog but compression results are not so impressive compared to JPEG or WEBP if you want the image to hold up under close inspection. On the other hand there is something that seems almost infantile about image su…

You're using the term "OS" but you're not talking about OSes you're talking about kernels.

The OS is what comes with the computer or gets installed in the default setup if you're installing yourself. Most of it is userspace.

Distros like Arch & Gentoo allow you to build a custom OS which in doing so blurs the definition quite a lot, but ultimately when people say "macOS" that term includes quite a lot of userspace things. Bundled software is absolutely a core part of every popularly used definition of the word "OS".

Re: macOS 14 will support JPEG XL

#43

Post by [deleted] »

iamakulov wrote: post #30
pacetherace wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can't it be enabled via an extension? Similar to how media players support third party codec.

Not really. AFAIK (correct me if I’m wrong!) first-party and third-party codecs in media players are kinda equal: you load a file, and the media player picks which codec to delegate that file to. You can’t do that in with a Chrome extension – the extensions can manipulate HTML and run custom JS, but that’s more or less it (plus some basic browser-level stuff like work with tabs and intercept network requests). This d…

[deleted]

Re: macOS 14 will support JPEG XL

#44

Post by twotwotwo »

I hope it shows up in Safari and that this sign of interest from others gets it a second shot in Chrome.

Just the JPEG recompression is arguably worth the price of entry; it's less savings than AVIF, of course, but it's easier to adopt now, where re-encoding everything as AVIF is a much larger hump to get over. Its other modes provide some real benefits for users for very-high-quality and lossless images as well as any situation where progressive display helps. For folks producing images, is much easier to fit in than AVIF for anyone who needs to encode a lot on the CPU.

Re: macOS 14 will support JPEG XL

#46

Post by lonjil »

derefr wrote: post #34
jez wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I sincerely hope this might make Chrome change its mind. I take this to suggest that Chrome actively decided against implementing JPEG XL? Did they consider supporting it and reject support for it, or has it simply not been prioritized, but still might be prioritized one day? If the decision was intentional: did they state a reason why?

They did all the work required to implement it, sat around for a few months, and then removed it , before anyone else even noticed it was there / had a chance to start integrating it. My personal conspiracy theory is that some Google engineer who works on Chrome, came up with "JPEG XL support" as a feature they could work on, pushed it through to prod, patted themselves on the back, and forgot about it; but this was…

The work wasn't done by anyone on the Chrome team. Someone at Google Research Zurich (I don't recall who) wrote the patches and submitted them. Actually, I think that they've even kept the patches up to date with newer Chrome releases so in theory it would be easy to re-introduce JXL into Chrome if there is a will to do it...

Re: macOS 14 will support JPEG XL

#47

Post by lonjil »

pgeorgi wrote: post #29
lonjil wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Their justification was more that adding it would be committing a lot of hardware Which is completely nonsensical. Hardware support is meaningless for web images.

Hardware accelerated handling was one of the arguments used to oppose a WASM based implementation that sites could use at will to prove that there's demand for JPEG-XL support (and that the Chrome team provides, by the way).

No it wasn't. WASM implementations are simply slower than native support. No browser uses HW accelerated decode for AVIF images or JXL. I think Safari might use HW for JPEG, but that's it across all browsers.

Re: macOS 14 will support JPEG XL

#48

Post by chungy »

pgeorgi wrote: post #29
lonjil wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Their justification was more that adding it would be committing a lot of hardware Which is completely nonsensical. Hardware support is meaningless for web images.

Hardware accelerated handling was one of the arguments used to oppose a WASM based implementation that sites could use at will to prove that there's demand for JPEG-XL support (and that the Chrome team provides, by the way).

There's not much Google can do to stop sites from loading libjxl.wasm.

Re: macOS 14 will support JPEG XL

#49

Post by eyelidlessness »

slig wrote: post #22
masswerk wrote: post #9

Finally, a good reason to upgrade (again).

Is there a specific reason why this has to be a OS update thing? I know that it's likely that they don't update the emoji font outside major OS updates so people have an extra reason to update.

It doesn’t have to be, but Apple has generally deferred new functionality to major versions, especially since they moved to an annual release cadence. There have also been a few exceptions since then, but they’re usually headline features which were supposed to bolster the major release but fell behind schedule.

Re: macOS 14 will support JPEG XL

#50

Post by concise_unicorn »

kstrauser wrote: post #38
amoerie wrote: post #2

As a radiology software developer: please please let JPEG XL become a thing. I sincerely hope this might make Chrome change its mind. JPEG XL is a game changer for 16 bit lossless images. The technical landscape for these kinds of images today is barren.

I am suuuper ignorant on the subject, but is this something that could replace DICOM?

No, DICOM is a container format that can contain JPEG XL image data
Post reply on HN