Chrome decided not to support it because they want to push AVIF instead. Firefox followed suit. Then Apple actually decided to support JXL. It has a decent amount of support in desktop software. So it's basically fine for personal use, but don't expect to use it on the web unless Google changes their tune.
this post was submitted on 21 Aug 2024
37 points (95.1% liked)
Technology
60055 readers
3360 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Screw chrome tbh. You can always embed https://github.com/niutech/jxl.js on the page as a fallback decoder for browsers that don’t support it (yet).
It's in Firefox but disabled by default.
It's under the about:config settings in Firefox. Search for image.jxl.enabled and set it to true.
Only in nightly unfortunately.
It's only enabled by default in nightlies. It's in Firefox stable, just not enabled by default.
Source: I am not using nightlies. I have it enabled in my browser. It's been there for over a year at least.
Strangely, I enabled it a year ago and jpegxl.info is still displaying that my navigator does not support jpegxl
JPEG XL is awesome. I got 1/8 of the size converting (very small, like 800kB) PNGs to lossless JXL.
GIMP can open them I think, but can’t save them. ImageMagick supports it obviously and so does KDE’s image library so I get previews there and whatnot.
It really depends on what you want to use them with imo, if you view them in a specific program and that supports it, go for it.