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

Firefox 157 will include JPEG XL by default on all platforms

groups.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 139 posts

Re: Firefox 157 will include JPEG XL by default on all platforms

#101

Post by spider-mario »

HappMacDonald wrote: post #74
Implicated wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> JpegXL will be the best of all worlds choice in a few years when software support is good. Where is the software support lacking other than the browsers at this point?

File explorer support, thumbnails, local image viewers and editors, import into other media software like slideshows, video editors, 3d modeling software, etc etc.

macOS and Windows’ respective file explorers and built-in image viewers both support it, as do Photoshop, GIMP, Krita and a few more. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JPEG_XL#Official_software_supp...

Re: Firefox 157 will include JPEG XL by default on all platforms

#103

Post by penguin_booze »

cbolton wrote: post #100
modeless wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is awesome! All it took was a Rust implementation I guess?

I just wrote a timeline here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49445897

> 2024: Firefox says they will ship support if Google implements a Rust version

OOC, why does Firefox care what language Google used for their implementation?

Re: Firefox 157 will include JPEG XL by default on all platforms

#104

Post by mkl »

wao0uuno wrote: post #97
rdsubhas wrote: post #61

JXL is one of the technologies that I hope we can fully transition over, i.e. in a couple of years nobody (even non-tech-savvy people) are sharing or copying or saving JPEGs.

What's wrong with JPEG and why is not using it beneficial in any way?

I think JPEGs will be around forever, but JPEG XL can losslessly recompress JPEGs to be smaller, so that would be one way.

Re: Firefox 157 will include JPEG XL by default on all platforms

#105

Post by cbolton »

penguin_booze wrote: post #103
cbolton wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just wrote a timeline here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49445897

> 2024: Firefox says they will ship support if Google implements a Rust version OOC, why does Firefox care what language Google used for their implementation?

They didn't want to add 100K lines of multithreaded C++, for security reasons. See https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/pull/1064.

(I edited the timeline to clarify)

Re: Firefox 157 will include JPEG XL by default on all platforms

#106

Post by tosti »

alwillis wrote: post #86
spartanatreyu wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not true. MacOS releases a new version each year, the current MacOS landscape looks like: - MacOS Sequoia (previous version, everything works as expected) - MacOS Tahoe (current version, broken experience, basically Apple's "Windows Vista/8 moment") - MacOS Golden Gate (next version, fixes what was broken in Tahoe, comes out in a month) I'm on MacOS Sequoia because I have things that can't be broken by updating to Ta…

> And I can't test the new version of Safari on my Windows or Linux devices because Safari isn't available for them. You can download three Linux-compatible WebKit-based browsers from Apple's WebKit page: Epiphany Technology Preview: https://webkitgtk.org/epiphany-tech-preview WPE: http://wpewebkit.org/download WebKitGTK: http://webkitgtk.org/download

There are subtle differences. From the top of my head, differences with osx include the font rendering and the tab order (which is broken for everything except form elements).

Re: Firefox 157 will include JPEG XL by default on all platforms

#107

Post by TacticalCoder »

Nition wrote: post #90

I had assumed that JPEG XL was for JPEGs that are Xtra Large, since that's what XL means on clothing and pretty much everywhere else. But apparently not: > 'The etymology of the name "XL" is as follows: JPEG has called all its new standards since j2k something that starts with an X: XR, XT, XS (S for speed, since it is very fast and ultra-low-latency), and now XL. The L is supposed to mean Long term, since the goal i…

> I had assumed that JPEG XL was for JPEGs that are Xtra Large, since that's what XL means on clothing and pretty much everywhere else.

Yup the name isn't the best pick indeed.

What most people don't know is that JPEG XL can be used to crush JPEG files by 15% to 25% without any single quality loss. And the resulting .jxl file can be used to then reproduce the original .jpg file bit-for-bit.

People can test this at the CLI for themselves.

Re: Firefox 157 will include JPEG XL by default on all platforms

#108

Post by spider-mario »

bityard wrote: post #89
trompetenaccoun wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are some other advantages, such as jxl being able to progressively load in web broswers, while avif can't for some reason. However avif compression seems to be better at low qualities, which might be relevant for some web applications, if one doesn't want to serve both jxl and avif. There's a good visual comparison here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SzsM4HMKmEI

JPEG has had progressive loading on browsers since the almost the very beginning. But everybody stopped using it because it added slightly to the file size and "looked ugly." According to most web designers, anyway, who would actually rather serve the user a blank page than have even one of their precious pixels out of place. I haven't actually seen a progressive jpeg rendering since the dialup days at any rate.

Most JPEGs are slightly smaller as progressive. The drawback is rather that it’s slightly more resource-intensive to decode, and if you overdo it and split the chroma, you can get weird effects: https://cloudinary.com/blog/progressive_jpegs_and_green_mart...

Re: Firefox 157 will include JPEG XL by default on all platforms

#109

Post by saagarjha »

josephg wrote: post #88
saagarjha wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’re not shipping code as part of Safari

You're moving the goalposts. You said: > Shipping unsafe C++ is easier on Apple platforms than Rust. ... Which seems false. I can easily believe that apple might not have rust tooling in their Safari build system. But that doesn't mean rust has poor support for apple platforms.

No, you're reading what you want out of my comment. The context of this thread was very clearly browser support of JPEG XL, not your apps.

Re: Firefox 157 will include JPEG XL by default on all platforms

#110

Post by cubefox »

Nition wrote: post #90

I had assumed that JPEG XL was for JPEGs that are Xtra Large, since that's what XL means on clothing and pretty much everywhere else. But apparently not: > 'The etymology of the name "XL" is as follows: JPEG has called all its new standards since j2k something that starts with an X: XR, XT, XS (S for speed, since it is very fast and ultra-low-latency), and now XL. The L is supposed to mean Long term, since the goal i…

JPEG XL is also "extra large" in the sense that it covers many features of more specialized image formats. They tried to come up with a pretty universal solution.

> It supports wide colour gamut as well as high dynamic range and high bit depth images. JPEG XL further includes features such as animation, alpha channels, layers, thumbnails, lossless and progressive coding (...)

https://jpeg.org/jpegxl/

More features are described in this nice overview article:

https://arxiv.org/pdf/2506.05987

Post reply on HN