macOS 14 will support JPEG XL • Hacker News Board

Re: macOS 14 will support JPEG XL

#121

Post by pgeorgi » Wed, Jun 07, 2023, 6:37 PM UTC

lonjil wrote: post #47

pgeorgi wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

>> Hardware accelerated handling was one of the arguments used to oppose a WASM based implementation

> No it wasn't.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33935355: "Wasm does not have the hardware acceleration necessary to efficiently do codecs."

Re: macOS 14 will support JPEG XL

#122

Post by saagarjha » Sun, Jun 11, 2023, 8:25 AM UTC

alwillis wrote: post #71

twotwotwo wrote: post #44

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…

> I hope it shows up in Safari and that this sign of interest from others gets it a second shot in Chrome. I'm pretty sure the Chrome team knew at the time they dropped JPEG XL that there was a decent chance Apple would implement it--there's certainly enough of a backchannel between the browser teams at Google, Apple, Mozilla and Microsoft.

Apple typically does not announce intent to implement things; they just implement them.

Re: macOS 14 will support JPEG XL

#123

Post by alwillis » Tue, Jun 13, 2023, 4:44 AM UTC

twotwotwo wrote: post #92

alwillis wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I hope it shows up in Safari and that this sign of interest from others gets it a second shot in Chrome. I'm pretty sure the Chrome team knew at the time they dropped JPEG XL that there was a decent chance Apple would implement it--there's certainly enough of a backchannel between the browser teams at Google, Apple, Mozilla and Microsoft.

Yeah, that is all odd to me; Google cited lack of "interest from the entire ecosystem" ( https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=117805... ). Mozilla also had an experimental JXL implemenation out there. I'd hope, like you said, that the browser vendors had enough of a backchannel to keep a good thing from fizzling because each is uncertain if the others will implement it. But if the Chrome folks did kn…

> So I guess I wonder if it's that the Chrome team had set the bar high, that they hadn't expected Apple to support JXL at the time they made the call, or something else.

I think it’s something else.

I’ve read enough CSS Working Group (and other groups) meeting minutes to know when Google wants to implement something, that’s what they do, often when the WebKit and Mozilla teams don’t agree.

Whatever happened for Google to reverse their position on JPEG XL, I don’t believe it has anything to do with the technical merits of the format or whether Apple had planned to implement it.