3 ms·
Chrome drops JPEG XL, “not enough interest”
- uberman 4y agoAnother one for https://killedbygoogle.com/ https://killedbygoogle.com/ I guess. It is kind of a wonder to me why anyone would embrace a new product offering from them at this point. I am interested in Carbon, but with a long history of dumping products that do not achieve hockey stick growth and my perception that Carbon will not have "consumer level adoption" I am leery to invest any time in it.
- phillipseamore 4y agoDoesn't seem like any of the OSS image processing servers support XL. A quick check over the docs of the major image CDN services and only Cloudinary has XL support (as expected, since their FUIF proposal was one of the foundations for XL along with Google's Pik). Chrome seem to have gone furthest in developing support for XL in Chrome, FF and Safari are way behind and there doesn't seem to be a clear signal from them that they'll continue working on it. From my perspective this really looks like Chrome isn't going to take the hit for being the only browser supporting an image format again, like it was for WEBP (which took years [and nearly a decade] to land in other browsers).
- markdog12 4y agoInteresting comment in that thread that's essentially saying the main person involved in the decision is involved with webp and avif: https://twitter.com/jonsneyers/status/1587052403936972801 https://twitter.com/jonsneyers/status/1587052403936972801 (Not sure if it has merit or not)
- markdog12 4y agoChrome issue tracker: https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=1178058#c84 https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=117805... A lot of pissed off people in there, and some very good points being made against this decision.