Comment on Google Revisits JPEG XL in Chromium After Earlier Removal

• YoSoySnekBoi@kbin.earth ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

  Mainly a compatibility thing afaik. For web stuff it's actually pretty great but people don't like not being able to download it in a format that works with image viewers and editing apps

  source

  • FaceDeer@fedia.io ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

    So it's basically "nobody wants to use it because nobody is using it."

    I actually rather like it, and at this point many of the tools I use have caught up so I don't mind it any more myself.

    source

    • Dojan@pawb.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

      Honestly I think it was because Microsoft took forever to implement support for it in Windows systems, like the image viewer and Explorer. That is assuming there’s support now. I don’t actually know.

      source
    • antonim@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

      My impression is that for ordinary non-power users it was supported from the start (i.e. the commonplace image viewers and editors could open it), it just felt annoying at first because it seemed forced upon the user.

      source
    • Sxan@piefed.zip ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

      I went through the same process, only with JPEGXL, because I don’t trust Google with anything.¹

      ¹ A blatant lie, since I haven’t found a good replacement for Go.

      source
    • Sxan@piefed.zip ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

      Probably some of that. Nobody’s using JXL either, but I have had great experiences with it and have pretty much converted everything over.

      source

      • raef@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

        Went aren’t you consistent with your use of thorn? There’s “either” and “everything”

        source

        • -> View More Comments
  • glowie@infosec.pub ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

    Would be nice if browsers could reconvert to PNG for download

    source

    • webhead@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

      There’s an extension in Firefox that I used to use for that. Would be nice to have and built in tho.

      source
  • webghost0101@sopuli.xyz ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

    I don’t know why it works but if i rename a .webp extension into a .png or .jpg it just works.

    source

    • FaceDeer@fedia.io ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

      It works because the .png and .jpg extensions are associated on your system with programs that, by coincidence, are also able to handle webp images and that check the binary content of the file to figure out what format they are when they're handling them.

      If there's a program associated with .png on a system that doesn't know how to handle webp, or that trusts the file extension when deciding how to decode the contents of the file, it will fail on these renamed files. This isn't a reliable way to "fix" these sorts of things.

      source

      • ProjectPatatoe@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

        My favorite thing about Irfanview is that it tells you of the extension doesn’t match the type and asks if you want it to ranme the file.

        source
• Blackfeathr@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

  It is apparently good at making animated media however its format is incompatible with many software media viewers.

  It’s the bane of my existence when trying to save an image, but I am also exploring its uses in making animated backgrounds for graphical chat interfaces.

  source
• mostlikelyaperson@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

  Nothing, most software has supported webp for 15 years, the last few stragglers have caught up two years ago or so, people on the internet are just very incapable of letting go of an opinion.

  source
• Glitchvid@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

  At this point if you’re going to use WebP you may as well just use AVIF instead, better compression ratio and the support matrix isn’t that different between them.

  source