this post was submitted on 06 Aug 2024
340 points (92.3% liked)

Technology

59963 readers
3471 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] reddig33@lemmy.world 27 points 4 months ago (17 children)

It’s only backwards compatible in that it can re-encode existing jpeg content into the newer format without any image loss. Existing browsers and apps can’t render jpegXL without adding a new decoder.

[–] ProdigalFrog@slrpnk.net 16 points 4 months ago (15 children)

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

Why is that a negative?

[–] Morphit@feddit.uk -1 points 4 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.

[–] SkyeStarfall@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

The alternative is to never have anything better, which is not realistic

Yes, it means more code, but that's an inevitability. We already have lots of legacy stuff, like, say, floppy disk drivers

[–] Morphit@feddit.uk 1 points 4 months ago

A balance has to be struck. The alternative isn't not getting anything better, it's being sure the benefits are worth the costs. The comment was "Why is [adding another decoder] a negative?" There is a cost to it, and while most people don't think about this stuff, someone does.

The floppy code was destined to be removed from Linux because no one wanted to maintain it and it had such a small user base. Fortunately I think some people stepped up to look after it but that could have made preserving old software significantly harder.

If image formats get abandoned, browsers are going to face hard decisions as to whether to drop support. There has to be some push-back to over-proliferation of formats or we could be in a worse position than now, where there are only two or three viable browser alternatives that can keep up with the churn of web technologies.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (12 replies)
load more comments (13 replies)