• cyd@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    People are quick to blame Google for the slow uptake of Jpeg XL, but I don’t think that can be the whole story. Lots of other vendors, including non-commercial free software projects, have also been slow to support it. Gimp for example still only supports it via a plugin.

    But if it’s not just a matter of Google being assholes, what’s the actual issue with Jpeg XL uptake? No clue, does anyone know?

    • redisdead@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      The issue with jpegxl is that in reality jpeg is fine for 99% of images on the internet.

      If you need lossless, you can have PNG.

      “But JPEGXL can save 0,18mb in compression!” Shut up nerd everyone has broadband it doesn’t matter

        • redisdead@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          I have several TBs of storage. I don’t remember the last time I paid attention to it.

          I don’t even use jpeg for it. I have all the raw pics from my DSLR and lossless PNGs for stuff I edited.

          It’s quite literally a non issue. Storage is cheap af.