Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by sedatk | Hacker News Reader

Full thread

sedatk

Browser support:

- JPEG XL: none

- HEIF: none

- AVIF: all but Edge

- WebP: all

View on HN

JPEG-XL is already implemented in ~95% of browsers in the wild (Chrome, Edge, Opera and Firefox), just only behind a flag.

Chrome Banishes Photo Format That Could Save Space on Your Phone

https://www.cnet.com/tech/computing/chrome-banishes-photo-fo...

And it'll stay unsupported until those flags come on by default.

The point of the article is that Chrome removes the experimental, behind-a-flag support of JPEG XL, which dramatically decreases the reach of JPEG XL, so yo say.

That list seems desktop centric - more browsing happens on the mobile. Hence Safari is a glaring omission on your list... Until Safari for iOS implements JPEG-XL, it is sadly not ready for mass deployment.

I was a little surprised about AVIF, so I looked it up and it doesn't seem to be quite there yet (though it's getting there). macOS Safari requires Ventura, and no support yet on Edge.

https://caniuse.com/avif

You're right I missed Edge, but Safari seems to have "partial support" whatever that means.

Safari 16 didn’t support animated AVIF but 16.1 does.

Firefox still doesn't support animated AVIF, or does it now?

that looks really nice, very sad that Edge chooses to go another route here. They use chromium code... if Edge starts supporting AVIF I'll start using AVIF.

The funny thing about AVIF support in Chrome is that, unlike JPEG XL, there was no experimental period. It was enabled by default from the beginning (in Chrome 85).

AVIF practically comes along "for free" by just having AV1 support in the first place.

I wonder what is the Mozilla's position on JPEG XL.

Mozilla is one of the founding members of AoM backing AVIF/AV1. They're shipping AVIF support enlabled.

The JPEG-XL bug hasn't received any news or updates for at least a year now and the support is disabled on all stable builds (meaning: you can't even enable it with a flag since it's not compiled in). You can enable a flag on nightlies.

It hasn't received news or updates because it has been locked. Basically Mozilla's position seems to be that they're not going to do anything on this front until Chrome does it first. I can only assume the decision makers at Mozilla feel the need to "prove their loyalty to the AOM", just like the Chrome codec devs, by blocking non-AOM codecs, in particular JXL.

Or, they just don't have the resources, market share, or interest to fight this battle. I can think of many better things FF should do other than try to push forward a new image format.

It is not a battle, everyone wants the same: to create the best experience for all the internet users by using free software.

We can arrive to the best solution by listening, by creating and studying the evidence, and by discussion.

Sad joke was that they are waiting for an “alternative implementation”, yet I’m still shocked that Mozilla people are alluding to that elsewhere in this very thread. Unbelievable…

Mozilla's engineers are enthusiastic about JPEG XL, but their directors less so. Mozilla's director a year ago: "I'm locking this conversation as it has passed the new information stage." This is not a great position, as loads of new information about human rater studies has been obtained, the codecs have advanced further significantly, the ecosystems are developing, industry is developing their stance, and even new objective metrics to evaluate codecs have been developed.

I'd like to highlight two things there:

My arguments for JPEG XL: https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/522#is... -- it comes with links to 3rd party evidence of the somewhat outrageous but correct claims.

Jon's arguments for JPEG XL: https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/522#is...

I'd have expected HEIF to be implemented in Safari, at the very least mobile Safari. Did Apple really not include their native image format on recent iPhones?

HEIF is the default format for the iOS Camera app and has been since at least 2018.

Yes, exactly. So it's pretty much the standard image format on the iPhone.

So I was wondering if/why it's not also part of Safari.

AVIF is based on HEIF + free codec. Apple's HEIC is HEIF + commercial patent-encumbered codec libre browsers are not allowed to use.

As mentioned above, Safari 16 is shipping with AVIF support so Edge is the last holdout.

Browser support for AVIF and Webp happened when? Browsers evolve over time.

I don't remember claiming otherwise. You just can't use it on web today, that's it.

Why don't Edge support AVIF? Isn't it a downstream of Chromium?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com