Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

pfaccioxx t1_iuagpku wrote

Oh look, yet another reason people should stop using that browser :P


leo_sk5 OP t1_iuahxt3 wrote

Reason for deprecation could entirely be docile, but given the recent events, my first instinct was to conclude that it must be to benefit competing standards where google is involved in development


C1ickityC1ack t1_iuaimmy wrote

What does this mean for laymen googlers who have no idea what deprecating jpegs means? Does this mean horribly compressed jpegs?


Konukaame t1_iualktz wrote

JPEG-XL (.jxl) is a new image format, and can be loosely understood to be an update to JPEG (.jpg/.jpeg).

Depreciation Deprecation means that they're dropping support for it, so if Chrome encounters a .jxl file, it won't know what to do with it.

That said, only Chromium and Firefox Nightly even had support for it in the first place, so unless you were using one of those and going somewhere that actually had .jxl content, this makes no difference in your life.


C1ickityC1ack t1_iuam9ni wrote

Thank you kind computer person.


Thirpunasorec t1_iuapnsn wrote



Ialwaysassume t1_iubh95h wrote

“Give him the stick”……..




Yokhen t1_iue6vmh wrote

Excuse me? I'm not doing anything to you, lady.


streakermaximus t1_iuanltf wrote

So it's a new format that didn't take off. Groovy.


leo_sk5 OP t1_iuar7bo wrote

That would have been seen when it would be properly supported by browsers. Chrome pushed webp support and made it commonplace across net, even though it finds no usage elsewhere. JPEG-XL to be fair took a significant time in development, but axing it in the monopoly browser means that any chance of adoption on web is fairly slim, and that would affect further adoption even if it is used in other cases, such as smartphone images (android is also google though)


zoinkability t1_iuaty8s wrote

The part that makes people skeptical is the fact that Google has their own competing next gen format. The fact that they went to the trouble of supporting it, then axed support, is a very fishy look.


TronKiwi t1_iuar9p4 wrote

Barely relevant but it's deprecate not depreciate (in this usage).


angrathias t1_iucy29m wrote

You described Obsoletion not deprecation. Deprecate means ‘do not use any more’ usually because it’s replaced with something better. Still supported though.


TronKiwi t1_iuanndm wrote

Deprecating something means dropping support for it.

JPEG XL is an extension of the familiar JPEG standard that provides better compression ratios and quality; that is to say, for the same file size, a JPEG XL is going to be much better quality than a JPEG.

This means that JPEGs as we know them are unaffected, but for whatever reason Google appears to have decided that it's not pushing forward the revolutionary JPEG XL, probably in favour of WebP.


Jakanapes t1_iuar3nc wrote

In favor of webp? That is a shockingly cynical and completely accurate assumption.


leo_sk5 OP t1_iuas5oh wrote

>probably in favour of WebP

I think it would be avif. WebP can't compete with jpeg-xl in terms of feature set. But compared to avif, jpeg-xl allows seamless transition to jpeg (for compatibility), progressive decode, higher bit depth HDR, and ability to use common encode/decode pathways with jpeg.


Active-Beginning3679 t1_iui414s wrote

Right. In terms of pure bit rate, jpeg is awful, webp is better, and avif and jpeg-xl are better still. The thing is that avif has a lot of weird quirks due to it being a hack of a video codec: AV1. JPEG-XL is a much better image format just in terms of feature set, definitely better for high quality images. I use avif because it was out first, but I planned to switch to jpeg-xl once browser support was better.


pfaccioxx t1_iuanax9 wrote

Most likely google is working on something that would complicate with JPEG-XL in some way


typesett t1_iuaoirt wrote

Use multiple browsers y’all

earmark chrome as the browser to use for the google stuff

use Firefox for surfing and most stuff

maybe safari for specific websites to mix things up


fgdfghdhj5yeh t1_iuav6jm wrote

use user agent randomizer and be a different person every refresh!


pfaccioxx t1_iuaqwim wrote

A decent soloson for people who need to use a chromium browser, but that can create a minor inconvenience that will prevent meany people from doing so

Thoth I personally feel that the slight Google Chrome convenience of being able to integrate directly with some Google services is not worth it considering all the downsides that come with that browser combined with the fact that pretty much all google services that I know of can be used without that sapific browser.

Almost any other chromium browser is better then Google Chrome.


qtx t1_iuchdqe wrote

Next time use Chrome when writing a comment, it has spellcheck.


pfaccioxx t1_iueab7q wrote

My browser has a built in spell check, and yes I do use it, I have a spelling impairment that makes it hard to spell things correctly even with it and I don't have hours to spend on typing comments to perfect spelling that realistically a very tiny number of people will ever read

Also no one should use Google Chrome, even for people who don't like Firefox / Safari (for some reason) almost any other chromium browser is better then Google Chrome.


Bangaladore t1_iuajhzd wrote

What browser do you use? This is a chromium feature, so unless you are using Firefox, you have been conned.


pfaccioxx t1_iuan3vk wrote

I'm well aware that prity much everything besides Firefox, Safari, forks of those 2 browsers, and a few other super obscure browsers that almost no one uses everything is based of Google's chromium engine. I persanalay beleave people in general should switch away from chromium browsers in order to prevent Google from forming a browser monopoly, but I understand that for some people that's not realistic. But even for those people who need to use a chromium browser, there is literally 0 reason to use Google Crome besides laziness ^(if it was pre-set as the default browser on there computer), and the slight convenience of being able to integrate directly with some Google services ^(almost all of witch have just as as viable if not better alternatives) as most chromium browsers are better then Google Chrome, and individual web browser maintainers can alter there browser beyond the base code of chromium to implement things base chromium dos not or to retain things that Google is removing ^(although that requires extra work on those browser's maintainers, most of witch realistically are not going to do so beyond what they have to)


patrys t1_iuat1sf wrote

Chromium is not a rendering engine, it’s a “chrome” (another word for user interface) engine. Chromium browsers are based on Blink which itself is a WebKit fork. WebKit is the Safari fork of KHTML which was an open source rendering engine created for KDE.


thenerdal t1_iub7r99 wrote

Chromium isn't an engine, Blink is. And it's not Google's but it's developed by 80 different companies.


[deleted] t1_iubdi2d wrote



thenerdal t1_iubfpu7 wrote

Nah chromium is a project, Blink is the engine to it but it's developed by more companies.


ReformedPC t1_iuaowpr wrote

If it's not supported for Chrome, that means you won't see it anywhere and any browser because most people use Chrome.


fgdfghdhj5yeh t1_iuawt5e wrote

apng was around on sites for 10 years before chrome supported it :^) the chromers just got a static dead image lmao


ReformedPC t1_iuaxs0z wrote

We live in a complete different era my dude, everything is monetized now and I can guarantee you that popular sites won't have any JPEG-XL knowing they could lose money if their sites have empty spots.

Look at Flash when it got discontinued, yeah there are still ways to enable Flash but look at all the popular Flash sites that switched to HTML5 to make sure their sites don't die.


fgdfghdhj5yeh t1_iub1pbe wrote

The browser sends a header saying which images it supports and websites can send back the best format that it does support. (I say can there cuz some only have jpeg, but now many have jpeg, webp, avif, and will send accordingly)

flash got killed due to terrible security and being able to access the underlying system, same reason java got killed off on web. Same reason web assembly is so slow to adopt anything, even threading, because of security


thenerdal t1_iub6v7t wrote

I keep trying Firefox but for some reason, it's never as smooth as Chrome and I don't like the way it looks. Plus I like the features.

Same for Android, no tabbed browsing on Firefox for tablets is stupid.


[deleted] t1_iubdv5w wrote



thenerdal t1_iubfjwz wrote

I don't have a windows laptop with it on me right now but last I tried, it had a white square on the top left that kept bugging me even with add ons.

VERY SMALL thing to be annoyed by I know, but that looked ugly to me. I use browsers in Windowed mode and it's hidden in full screen.


pfaccioxx t1_iubqn6b wrote

You know you can customize what buttons appear in the toolbars and were right? (right click on an empty space, click "customize toolbar" from the dropdown menu and then drag the button were you want it or out of the toolbar before clicking the "Done" button to finalize the changes.)


thenerdal t1_iubs6jz wrote

No it's not a button. It can't be removed.


pfaccioxx t1_iue9qw0 wrote

have you tried? cos I have never found something with Firefox's interface that can't be customized


petesapai t1_iuc19eu wrote

Used Firefox for ages. Even with all its issues. Biggest one being that adding comments in reddit and other text form fields simply don't work. It was annoying.

But the cherry on the cake was i had to reinstall my os. Made an export of my Firefox bookmarks into an HTML file (exported from Firefox).

Wasn't able to import it back into Firefox. But it worked in chrome. Good bye Firefox.


pfaccioxx t1_iue8yo8 wrote

That sounds like you screwed something up on your end as opposed to the fault of Firefox as a program, cos I have never run into those issues when I have used Firefox

But even if you do feel the need to switch away from Firefox, you still shouldn't use Google Chrome compared to literally any other chromium browser (witch not counting Firefox / Safari forks, or super obscure browsers almost no one uses) is unforcently all of them


petesapai t1_iuge23r wrote

I've been fighting the Firefox good fight for years. Always stuck by it. Spent so much time looking up the text area issue (happens during cut/copy/paste). Still stuck with it. But the export (been doing exports since Netscape, it's not complicated) issue was enough.

So nope, not from my end.

And I jump from chrome and edge on my pc now. They're all chromium based anyways.

Still use Firefox as my default android browser though.