Image format “JPEG XL” set for adoption by major browsers within 2026 — 5ch: “Guess WebP’s doomed”

From our other sites

The story

Mozilla announced plans to officially support the next-generation image format “JPEG XL” in its upcoming “Firefox 157” release. The browser will use a Rust-based decoder developed by Google, and with Chrome’s team reportedly leaning the same way, the major browsers look set to fall into line by the end of 2026. WebP and AVIF have so far been the go-to successors to JPEG, but reactions in 5ch threads were mixed — some welcomed the news with comments like “guess WebP’s going away,” while others were cooler on it, saying things like “just another format to deal with” or “isn’t WebP/AVIF good enough already?”

Firefox reveals plans to support “JPEG XL”

Mozilla has announced plans to officially adopt the next-generation image format “JPEG XL” in Firefox 157.

It will use a Rust-based decoder developed by Google. Google Chrome’s development team has indicated similar intentions, meaning “JPEG XL” could see broad support across major browsers as soon as within 2026.

Source: atmarkit.itmedia.co.jp / Original article here

What people said

2AnonymousSep 8, 2026 11:02
What's wrong with regular old JPEG anyway?
3AnonymousSep 8, 2026 11:07
Re: #2
Same reason you're no good, right?
12AnonymousSep 8, 2026 11:25
Re: #2
By the time about 1/10 of the file has loaded you can already sort of make out the image
19AnonymousSep 8, 2026 12:16
Re: #2
At this point its image quality and compression ratio aren't great. The mosquito noise around text and fonts is especially annoying, and reds can sometimes degrade too.
4AnonymousSep 8, 2026 11:08
So what happens to WebP and AVIF?
14AnonymousSep 8, 2026 11:28
Re: #4
Only copyright trolls (lit. "893," slang for yakuza) will be happy about this — it's just an inconvenient garbage format.
5AnonymousSep 8, 2026 11:09
Re: #1
It's basically just JPEG though
6AnonymousSep 8, 2026 11:11
Feels like WebP's already good enough
7AnonymousSep 8, 2026 11:15
JPEG XL:
Compresses even smaller and cleaner than WebP while keeping very high quality.

Nothing but upsides. WebP's probably done for.
9AnonymousSep 8, 2026 11:21
JPEG 2000 never really took off though
38AnonymousSep 8, 2026 13:40
Re: #9
Same story as the 2,000 yen bill (a banknote that was minted but never really caught on in circulation).
10AnonymousSep 8, 2026 11:22
Hard to say out loud. Isn't there a nickname for it or something?
11AnonymousSep 8, 2026 11:23
Right now Safari's the only one that supports it
22AnonymousSep 8, 2026 12:32
Re: #11
Isn't this article about Chrome supporting it too, with Firefox now officially deciding to support it as well?
13AnonymousSep 8, 2026 11:26
I'm honestly not a big fan of shared standards getting swapped out for this and that all the time.
15AnonymousSep 8, 2026 11:47
You fatties are all XL-sized lol
16AnonymousSep 8, 2026 11:48
Japan's XL is just a Medium in America
18AnonymousSep 8, 2026 12:14
Re: #12
JPEG already has progressive loading too. It might get picked up more as a WebP replacement, but JPEG's too widespread to ever go away.
20AnonymousSep 8, 2026 12:18
Can we please just pick ONE standard
21AnonymousSep 8, 2026 12:19
Sounds like it could be a security nightmare… A WebP vulnerability was discovered in 2023 where simply viewing an image could execute arbitrary code embedded in the file. There must still be tons of apps out there that haven't patched it.
23AnonymousSep 8, 2026 12:34
Converting WebP back to JPG is a hassle, and it degrades the quality too — no upside whatsoever. Just standardize on JPG already.
24AnonymousSep 8, 2026 12:38
Quite a bit more complex than baseline JPEG, isn't it
25AnonymousSep 8, 2026 12:38
Re: #2
Honestly, for once I'd like to hear a reason it ISN'T bad
27AnonymousSep 8, 2026 12:39
I don't care if the file's bigger, I just want lossless compression
28AnonymousSep 8, 2026 12:52
Re: #27
It supports lossless too
29AnonymousSep 8, 2026 12:55
Bet it's sluggish to open in exchange for that high compression ratio
30AnonymousSep 8, 2026 13:02
So annoying when you email a photo taken on an iPhone and people tell you they can't open it sometimes
31AnonymousSep 8, 2026 13:08
Guess it'll end up like old-school JPEG again, with hardware decoding and all?
32AnonymousSep 8, 2026 13:22
Mobile-oriented sites use thumbnails that are like 1MB apiece, total waste — sure, a bit more efficiency helps there, but is that really going to change much?
36AnonymousSep 8, 2026 13:35
Re: #32
If you try to keep the quality up in JPEG you end up setting it to 90+, so compared to that this'd probably come out around half the size
33AnonymousSep 8, 2026 13:23
Re: #12
progressive
34AnonymousSep 8, 2026 13:26
Re: #28
Actually, since WebP and later formats were built to replace the existing ones, they carry over all the options and settings from PNG, JPEG, etc. WebP lets you choose lossless or lossy and set a quality factor too. The "WebP or nothing!" crowd doesn't get that.
35AnonymousSep 8, 2026 13:29
We've already got WebP and AVIF and now there's yet another one? Everyone already agrees the existing formats are good enough, so a new format's going to have a rough time catching on.
37AnonymousSep 8, 2026 13:39
Honestly I just want HEIC gone

Background and key points of this discussion

JPEG XL is an image format that was standardized internationally in 2022. It supports both lossless and lossy compression, can convert existing JPEG files without any loss of quality, and features progressive display that renders images starting from a low-resolution version, among other traits. Google had previously shelved plans to adopt it in Chrome at one point, and during that gap WebP and AVIF gained ground, leading some to view JPEG XL as a “format that got left behind.” With the announcement of a Rust-based decoder this time, previously raised concerns about memory safety have eased, and momentum for adoption has grown in both Firefox and Chrome. Reactions in the thread were split — some are optimistic that “WebP might disappear,” while others remain cautious, arguing it’s “just adding to format sprawl” or that “the existing formats are good enough.” In practice, even when a new format appears, it rarely replaces existing formats like JPEG or PNG right away; OS- and app-level support typically lags behind browser support, so multiple formats are likely to coexist for the foreseeable future.

*This article is compiled as an excerpt/summary from the 5ch (Business News+) thread “Not JPG, Not PNG — Major Browsers Set to Officially Adopt “JXL” Within 2026.”

Comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *