<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>lucideer</author><text>You&amp;#x27;re using the term &amp;quot;OS&amp;quot; but you&amp;#x27;re not talking about OSes you&amp;#x27;re talking about kernels.&lt;p&gt;The OS is what comes with the computer or gets installed in the default setup if you&amp;#x27;re installing yourself. Most of it is userspace.&lt;p&gt;Distros like Arch &amp;amp; Gentoo allow you to build a custom OS which in doing so blurs the definition quite a lot, but ultimately when people say &amp;quot;macOS&amp;quot; that term includes quite a lot of userspace things. Bundled software is absolutely a core part of every popularly used definition of the word &amp;quot;OS&amp;quot;.</text><parent_chain><item><author>PaulHoule</author><text>As a mirrorless photographer who wants to publish photos on the web that look like they came out of a mirrorless camera I want JPEG XL.  In trials I&amp;#x27;ve done,  AVIF works well for a throwaway splash image for a blog but compression results are not so impressive compared to JPEG or WEBP if you want the image to hold up under close inspection.&lt;p&gt;On the other hand there is something that seems almost infantile about image support in the &amp;quot;operating system&amp;quot; being pivotal.  If you read a review of a new MacOS in ArsTechnica you might get the idea that 99% of an OS is about what the buttons look like but in terms of the computer science definition,  image codecs are definitely a userspace thing and as a Windows or Linux user I never wait for my OS to support an image format,  I just install the codec and code away.</text></item><item><author>amoerie</author><text>As a radiology software developer: please please let JPEG XL become a thing. 
I sincerely hope this might make Chrome change its mind.
JPEG XL is a game changer for 16 bit lossless images. The technical landscape for these kinds of images today is barren.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>macOS 14 will support JPEG XL</title><url>https://twitter.com/jonsneyers/status/1665792517613256705</url></story>
<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>kps</author><text>As an ‘operating system’ OS X includes user space tools like the Finder and Quick Look in particular where vendor support is helpful.</text><parent_chain><item><author>PaulHoule</author><text>As a mirrorless photographer who wants to publish photos on the web that look like they came out of a mirrorless camera I want JPEG XL.  In trials I&amp;#x27;ve done,  AVIF works well for a throwaway splash image for a blog but compression results are not so impressive compared to JPEG or WEBP if you want the image to hold up under close inspection.&lt;p&gt;On the other hand there is something that seems almost infantile about image support in the &amp;quot;operating system&amp;quot; being pivotal.  If you read a review of a new MacOS in ArsTechnica you might get the idea that 99% of an OS is about what the buttons look like but in terms of the computer science definition,  image codecs are definitely a userspace thing and as a Windows or Linux user I never wait for my OS to support an image format,  I just install the codec and code away.</text></item><item><author>amoerie</author><text>As a radiology software developer: please please let JPEG XL become a thing. 
I sincerely hope this might make Chrome change its mind.
JPEG XL is a game changer for 16 bit lossless images. The technical landscape for these kinds of images today is barren.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>macOS 14 will support JPEG XL</title><url>https://twitter.com/jonsneyers/status/1665792517613256705</url></story>