I think it's a great opportunity for Firefox to stand out by supporting JPEG XL before any other browser.
Imagine images served by Cloudflare and Cloudinary load faster and look better only with Firefox. Firefox was a pioneer of web technologies and it should win the title back, if Firefox just keep following Chrome without any differentiation, why would people choose Firefox?
If the decoder memory safety is a concern, maybe Mozilla can start a crowd funding campaign to sponsor a Rust decoder, even the campaign itself will attract reports and attentions for Firefox.
Mozilla argued AVIF was already supported as a same generation but clearly JPEG XL has many advantages:
Supports from Facebook, Adobe (they're adding export support), Intel and VESA, Krita, The Guardian, libvips, Cloudinary, Shopify
Just wanted to join in and say: "Yes please!"
Lossless JPEG re-compression might be the best thing to happen to web media in a looong while.
I serves 20+MB JPEG files on the regular and would love switching to 10+MB JPEG-XL files instead. Surely all the mobile internet users and image CDNs of the world would love that too.
And I will gladly check the Accept headers on every request and tell people "Hey, this page loads faster on Firefox! Consider switching?" until other browsers agree.
I've been using JPEG XL on my images for a while now, it's a good format. Hope to see it enabled in FF soon regardless what a certain big company decides.
In my own tests and usage JXL worked best among modern image formats, to the point where I thought it was almost a forgone conclusion that it would be enabled in browsers very soon. Like the other people here, I hope you can enable support by default.
JPEG XL is the best image format available today for vast majority of web use cases. It ought to be fully supported by the web's best browser.
Yes to Jpeg XL!
Please Mozilla, give it a shot. I've (we've all!) been waiting for a successor to JPEG for so long. I've tried many formats over the years but, long story short, nothing has been as efficient and polished as JXL. I think it is truly ready, now, to become the new image format of choice, on all platforms. It just needs recognition and adoption.
For those that haven't checked JPEG XL out, it's as simple as grabbing XnView and batch converting. I'm getting around 80% savings at q80 (from JPEG q90 at 12 MPx), and cant find noticeable quality loss. Obviously results will vary (digital art and smooth gradients seem more needy), but it's extremely impressive. Then there's the lossless mode, that's beating WebP in many tests. Plus royalty-free. Biggest downside is encoding speed, but it's to be expected and quite tolerable (and beats competitors). HEIC and AVIF still have so many problems, but JXL is ready.
Is already 10+ year google trying so pushy on their webp and vp8 codec, but still failed to attract many party to use them. And i wont to used it even they rename it to AV1 and AVIF, is still worst. h264 is still better on average usage than AV1. Same case with microsd on android phone which google trying get rid it since 2015, or since android 9 by tuning down the speed on os level, and used those as performance problem as excuse, in reality is not the case. All the reason behind it is just solely political, google want controlling you, use their services, is more worse than Microsoft do in the past.
I hope firefox will supported jpeg xl, and i will switched back to firefox and never going back to crappy chrome.
+1 to JPEG XL support in Firefox -- it seems like it has potential to be "one format to rule them all"
A somewhat more in-depth comparison and analysis of the data provided by Google can be found here: https://cloudinary.com/blog/contemplating-codec-comparisons
Short version: Real life data appears to support the case for JPEG-XL not only feature-wise, but also with regards to speed and efficiency of compression.
I really hope to see support for this. That would be amazing.