I heard about this recently and decided to look into it. Seems neat. When I convert my existing .jpeg images to .jxl, they look identical, but take up only ~60% the space. Windows file explorer and paint dont support it however, but ImageGlass does. Considering converting all my images to .jxl to save on storage space (esp. cloud storage). Thoughts?
Chrome decided not to support it because they want to push AVIF instead. Firefox followed suit. Then Apple actually decided to support JXL. It has a decent amount of support in desktop software. So it’s basically fine for personal use, but don’t expect to use it on the web unless Google changes their tune.
Screw chrome tbh. You can always embed https://github.com/niutech/jxl.js on the page as a fallback decoder for browsers that don’t support it (yet).