Out of the widely supported ones, it's quite good, yeah. Overall, I'd say JPEG XL is the better one. Ironically, only Safari supports it out of the box. Firefox requires a Nightly version with tweaking in about:config. Chrome used to have a feature flag, but has since removed it.

[–] fdnomad@programming.dev 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

The website mentions

Migrating to JPEG XL reduces storage costs because servers can store a single JPEG XL file to serve both JPEG and JPEG XL clients.

Does anyone know how that works?

[–] Dumhuvud@programming.dev 1 points 1 month ago

I assume, decoding it on the fly? It's possible to encode a JPEG as a JPEG XL losslessly.

[–] brachypelmide@lemmy.zip 1 points 2 months ago

I think compatibility was also being taken into account here. When not looking at compatibility, JXL is the best hands down. It's criminal how little software supports it.