• ExLisperA
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    84
    ·
    edit-2
    22 hours ago

    Given these positive signals, we would welcome contributions

    Poor Google doesn’t have the manpower to implement it. They can only accept contributions from volunteers.

  • 6nk06@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    91
    ·
    1 day ago

    Given these positive signals

    Those idiots waited for 4 years because they followed the hype of the moment. I’m glad I removed Google from my life.

        • ramjambamalam@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          8 hours ago

          That used to be what Microsoft (Internet Explorer) was famous for. I guess Chrome has lived long enough to be the villain, but Firefox is still the hero to me.

    • panda_abyss@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      40
      ·
      1 day ago

      This must be your first time seeing what Google support looks like

      This is pretty standard unless you can get an exec’s personal attention.

  • reddig33@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    1 day ago

    I would be more excited about JPEG XL if it was backward compatible. Not looking forward to yet another image standard that requires OS and hardware upgrades simply so servers can save a few bytes.

    • Laser@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      32
      ·
      1 day ago

      How would a new format be backwards-compatible? At least JPEG-XL can losslessly compress standard jpg for a bit of space savings, and servers can choose to deliver the decompressed jpg to clients that don’t support JPEG-XL.

      Also from Wikipedia:

      Computationally efficient encoding and decoding without requiring specialized hardware: JPEG XL is about as fast to encode and decode as old JPEG using libjpeg-turbo

      Being a JPEG superset, JXL provides efficient lossless recompression options for images in the traditional/legacy JPEG format that can represent JPEG data in a more space-efficient way (~20% size reduction due to the better entropy coder) and can easily be reversed, e.g. on the fly. Wrapped inside a JPEG XL file/stream, it can be combined with additional elements, e.g. an alpha channel.

      • reddig33@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 day ago

        All you have to do is add a small traditional JPEG image at the start of the file. It doesn’t have to be high resolution or more than a couple of kb. The new format decoder would know this, and skip the traditional jpeg “header”, rendering the newer file format embedded in the image.

        • wischi@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          32
          ·
          1 day ago

          Would completely defeat the purpose of making a new smaller file format if we prefix if with the old format.

          • reddig33@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 day ago

            If you’re really saving 20% in file size with XL, adding back a very compressed preview image that takes up one or two percent isn’t going to cost you much.

    • LordKitsuna@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      24 hours ago

      It requires neither of those upgrades though? Unless you’re still using Windows XP I guess for some reason. It’s just an update to the image decoder