Yep, I was totally nerd-sniped by the image. I've never seen an engineer draw a whiteboard diagram anywhere near that detailed and tidy. No acronyms, consistent title case, descenders on a baseline - everything about it is wrong. It's so counter to reality, I seriously wondered if it was a joke.

The Nano Banana team should be pissed Google PR is distributing such a terrible photo. The poses are stilted, expressions frozen, even the eye-lines are off. Why couldn't they just use a Google Pixel phone to snap a photo of real Google engineers in a real Google office and upload it to Google Photos? Not Google enough?

Based on what I've heard, Google is monitoring per-org usage and strongly / incessantly encouraging teams to experiment with the technology, so a lot of tokens get spent on pointless stuff like that. The preceding diagram, which is needlessly busy and blurry, appears to be AI-generated too.

Came here to say the same thing. Why add this fake image?

Not to mention those IMAGES. Slop diagrams hurt

> That's rich coming from the company that tried to kill it

This post is written by three of the authors of the JPEG XL spec, implementors of the reference and rust implementations of libjxl, and...longtime google employees.

> Safari (2023) led among major browsers, while Firefox and Chrome currently maintain experimental support.

AVIF and webp kind of only exist for the web, they get used when you want to really crunch down on data as much as possible. They aren’t really used for files you’d save on your computer or get out of a camera.

JPEG XL is replacing regular jpeg and heif for photography. It offers 16 bit color rather than 8 from jpeg and HDR support along with a ton of extra features.

Every OS but Android supports it, safari supports it, chrome and Firefox have it behind a beta flag.

It's all about licences. If you need the images for the web: go for jpegli, webp and avif - the distance to jpegxl or webp2 is not worth the hassle:

https://show.quicky.club/results/14/f8/f1/d8db84d57222d32db6...

It's worse: Google added and then dropped even experimental support of jxl in 2021-2022. Several years later they adopted the rust jxl library, but have kept it behind experimental flags.

Probably got some time to go. The new rust decoder likely needs more time to be proven reliable and safe, and Firefox doesn't even get the flag to turn it on until the next release 152.

It's a standard ISO Standard thing which could perhaps be justified when standards where printed on paper.

The JPEG XL team released a draft to try to work around this but couldn't avoid it for the official standard release.

It's an open standard because the concepts and reference implementation are free and open source even if the PDF is paywalled. Realistically you could just pirate the PDF and write a jpeg xl encoder/decoder and your code wouldn't be infringing on any patents.

"Open Standard" means "Anybody is allowed to buy it"

QOI is cute as an experiment, but it is not a serious image format unless you work in extremely constrained environments.

QOI supports a VERY limited set of use cases compared to jpegXL.

Yes. They're adding it back to Chrome.

This last January at FOSDEM there was a panel with representatives from different browser companies. During the panel Kadir Topal, a web platform product manager at Google, indicated that because of the interest they saw in JPEG XL through the Interop Project that they changed their course on supporting it.

https://github.com/web-platform-tests/interop

The video of the panel can be found at https://fosdem.org/2026/schedule/event/7E7387-browser_in_202... . He starts speaking on the issue at about 13:00

They added it back as an experimental flag again. Likely the new rust based decoder and adoption in to other platforms and standards changed their decision.