News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Mozilla concludes that JPEG-XL is not for them by Zababa on Tuesday January 31, 2023 @09:27AM (#34595367)
I don't really understand. From the discussion, it seems that JPEG-XL is better in every way than AVIF. Or maybe just don't add anything if they don't bring much. WebP is already a pain for no real benefit.
Re:Mozilla concludes that JPEG-XL is not for them by Strom on Tuesday January 31, 2023 @11:27AM (#34597269)
JPEG-XL is better for images, no doubt. However it lacks the political backing that AV1 and hence AVIF has. It’s sad from a technical standpoint but also just a reality of this world - politics decide things, not merit.
Re:Mozilla concludes that JPEG-XL is not for them by account42 on Wednesday February 01, 2023 @03:25AM (#34607912)
Politics trumping technical superiority being how things work should not mean that we accept politics trumping superiority. The only way this changes is with sufficient pushback. Unfortunately with web standards things have gotten so bad that I don't see any solution working out other than real anti-trust enforcement against Google.
Re:Mozilla concludes that JPEG-XL is not for them by JyrkiAlakuijala on Thursday February 02, 2023 @09:01AM (#34626554)
There are plenty of use cases where image quality or coding speed cannot be compromised because of competitive reasons. For example medical imaging, professional or prosumer photography, legal evidence, printing cannot always accept small details disappearing or accept any other compression related degradations. JPEG XL, due to its better quality quarantees and great lossless options will surface in these areas first. Later, it will propagate from these uses to operating systems and eventually to browsers, too. Unfortunately slower transition puts some additional work on the web community.