Technology

59374 readers

6264 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 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

340

JPEG is Dying - And that's a bad thing | 2kliksphilip (www.youtube.com)

submitted 3 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

156 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 16 points 3 months ago (15 children)

Existing browsers and apps can’t render jpegXL without adding a new decoder.

Why is that a negative?

[–] [email protected] -1 points 3 months ago (4 children)

https://xkcd.com/927/

Adding more decoders means more overheads in code size, projects dependencies, maintanance, developer bandwidth and higher potential for security vulnerabilities.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

1000006617

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago

I mean, the comic is even in the OP. The whole point is that AVIF is already out there, like it or not. I'm not happy about Google setting the standards but that has to be supported. Does JPEGXL cross the line where it's really worth adding in addition to AVIF? It's easy to yes when you're not the one supporting it.

load more comments (2 replies)

load more comments (12 replies)