Earlier quoted context omitted.
One particularly interesting (to me, at least) approach using progressive decoding was described by Jake Archibald ( https://jakearchibald.com/2025/present-and-future-of-progres... ). If browsers extended `srcset` with support for HTTP Range requests, we could use a progressive-encoded jpg (xl or not) file as the source for multiple detail levels. A device with a small screen would request the first 10kb of the image…
I don't think this is going to work out. With the way progressive loading works in JXL, you don't really hit "good looking" points aside from at DC resolution.
Firefox 157 will include JPEG XL by default on all platforms
121–130 of 137 posts
Re: Firefox 157 will include JPEG XL by default on all platforms
#122Earlier quoted context omitted.
At the basic job of showing a normal 24bpp photo on screen, the differences between the formats are marginal. jxl shines when you want to do anything even a little bit more complex. Support for lots more color formats, including fp ones. Support for an image with parts of it encoded losslessly, and parts with a lossy encoder. Great progressive decoding. And many more features.
The part of jpeg-xl I'm most excited for is when the 3d community starts standardizing the extra channels for depth maps, bump maps, roughness etc in the extra channels. You can use a single jpeg-xl as a full material system with progressive decoding for LOD and all the rest.
Re: Firefox 157 will include JPEG XL by default on all platforms
#123I'm curious how many HN people in 2026 have not yet heard of JPEG XL / jxl
I have only heard of it in passing. I wonder what it adds beyond Webp and Avif.
Re: Firefox 157 will include JPEG XL by default on all platforms
#124Will they add it to Firefox 115 for the remaining Windows 7/8 users or will you need a new operating system to add an image format?
The remaining users on EoL platforms should move on to supported ones.
Re: Firefox 157 will include JPEG XL by default on all platforms
#125Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apple is gonna do what apple wants.
What a funny tangent to go off on. JXL was dead. Apple is who brought it back to life[1], and the only reason Chrome resurrected JXL, and now Firefox followed their path, is because Apple pushed JXL support to a billion plus devices. I know people like complaining about Apple, but there's a "read the room" kind of moment where people just seem to either not know the context or are just knee jerking. [1] Worth noting…
Re: Firefox 157 will include JPEG XL by default on all platforms
#126Earlier quoted context omitted.
I suspect the real reason is safety. Rust isn't bulletproof but it's certainly much better than C++ when it comes to defending against memory corruption related attacks. And when you are building a decoder for untrusted data sent over the internet, this kind of thing matters a lot more.
For safety in decoding, isn't there WUFFS, also by Google, that's guaranteed safe and fast?
Re: Firefox 157 will include JPEG XL by default on all platforms
#127I 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…
Re: Firefox 157 will include JPEG XL by default on all platforms
#128Earlier quoted context omitted.
What Updates tied? App Store updates use same networking and storage as OS? Why it is bad?
because updating a single app via the app store is faster than updating the whole OS. Having a security vulnerability in a browser could be fixed immediately, but having to ship out a whole new OS leaves it open for a while. Especially with users generally being against/too lazy to do OS updates
Re: Firefox 157 will include JPEG XL by default on all platforms
#129Earlier quoted context omitted.
What Updates tied? App Store updates use same networking and storage as OS? Why it is bad?
because updating a single app via the app store is faster than updating the whole OS. Having a security vulnerability in a browser could be fixed immediately, but having to ship out a whole new OS leaves it open for a while. Especially with users generally being against/too lazy to do OS updates
Re: Firefox 157 will include JPEG XL by default on all platforms
#130Earlier quoted context omitted.
My wife, son and me not using Safari. Do not see how Safari relates to App Store. We use App Store.
The point of a PWA is that instead of downloading an actual binary app, you essentially get a webpage that runs like it was an app. They can be installed from anywhere and are safe by nature because they're really just webpages. That was the original conception of iPhone apps, until Steve Jobs realized just how much money could be made from the app store. Now you get to pay Apple a 30% cut for the privilege of instal…
Kneejerk reactions everywhere! Wow. And to think HN commenters like to think themselves superior to other reddit/instagram/linkedin/social media users.