Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by lonjil 1115 days ago
> Their justification was more that adding it would be committing a lot of hardware

Which is completely nonsensical. Hardware support is meaningless for web images.
1 comments
pgeorgi 1115 days ago
Hardware accelerated handling was one of the arguments used to oppose a WASM based implementation that sites could use at will to prove that there's demand for JPEG-XL support (and that the Chrome team provides, by the way).
link
lonjil 1115 days ago
No it wasn't. WASM implementations are simply slower than native support. No browser uses HW accelerated decode for AVIF images or JXL. I think Safari might use HW for JPEG, but that's it across all browsers.
link
pgeorgi 1113 days ago
>> Hardware accelerated handling was one of the arguments used to oppose a WASM based implementation

> No it wasn't.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33935355: "Wasm does not have the hardware acceleration necessary to efficiently do codecs."

link
chungy 1115 days ago
There's not much Google can do to stop sites from loading libjxl.wasm.
link