Does your Browser support APNGs?

[coldReactive]

http://i33.tinypic.com/6rj5ox.png

If the above image is not animated, your browser does not support Animated PNGs. Just wanted to know whose browser can, and cannot.

[wojox]

Cool, I see it with Firefox Minefield/3.7a1pre

[AllRadioisDead]

Damn straight it does.

[OpenGuard]

Firefox 3.5 and latest Opera - works just fine.

[sisco311]

works in links 2.2 :)

[dragos240]

works in links 2.2 :)
It does?!

[keiichidono]

Main browser: Chromium, no.
Secondary browser: Firefox 3.5, yes.

[CharlesA]

IE8 no. FF 3.5 yes.

[Tyche]

Firefox 3.0.14, yes ( Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.0.14) Gecko/2009090216 Ubuntu/9.04 (jaunty) Firefox/3.0.14)

[mhurst1022]

ie8 no. Ff 3.5 yes.
ie8???

[sisco311]

It does?!
yep

[Bachstelze]

APNG is just a dirty hack by Mozilla anyway. It is not part of the official PNG specs and the official libpng does not support it, so a browser should not be expected to support it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portable_Network_Graphics#Animation

[coldReactive]

APNG is just a dirty hack by Mozilla anyway. It is not part of the official PNG specs and the official libpng does not support it, so a browser should not be expected to support it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portable_Network_Graphics#Animation

Who knows, the official libpng may adopt it in the future if we're lucky.

[CharlesA]

ie8???

Why not? I don't even use it for day-to-day browsing. I just need to use it to test to make sure a page displays the same in IE as FF and Chrome.

EDIT: I don't know if I am more surprised that someone commented on it, or that someone registered to comment on it.

[Rhapsody]

APNG is just a dirty hack by Mozilla anyway. It is not part of the official PNG specs and the official libpng does not support it, so a browser should not be expected to support it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portable_Network_Graphics#Animation
Yeah, they'd rather we use the bloated and difficult MNG format instead, which will never happen because all of the major browser manufacturers have considered and rejected it as a possibility.


Who knows, the official libpng may adopt it in the future if we're lucky.
Unlikely. I read the comments when they were rejecting it.

One said they'd change their vote from NO to ABSTAIN if the APNG format stopped using the PNG MIME-type and extension (i.e. remove all of the advantages APNG has over MNG), and from ABSTAIN to YES if they added support for JNG and similar (i.e. turn APNG into into MNG under a different name). Another said the PNG situation was not like GIF, which was made with animation from the beginning (which is not true, the original GIF87a format had not animation, that was added with GIF89a).

They also said APNG "violates an established web standard" and suggested the even more hideous PNG-in-GIF hack as an alternative. Which I read as "violate an established web standard if you want, just don't violate our established web standard". Damn hypocrites.

They had their chance to be reasonable, and they chose to ignore what everyone else wants and persist in pushing the already-failed MNG format. It's time to ignore them unless, like the W3C already did with HTML 5.0, they finally relent and face reality. But that's no reason to stop current work.

[CharmyBee]

MNG failed? It's been around 11 years now and there's been a lazy cause into adopting it as a would-be forgotten standard.

[Rhapsody]

MNG failed? It's been around 11 years now and there's been a lazy cause into adopting it as a would-be forgotten standard.
Yes, it failed. It was standardized 11 years ago, yet I never see it in my everyday activities and only one browser (Konqueror) currently supports it. As far as an attempt to replace the animated GIF format goes, APNG is the only viable option. People making short animations don't care about web standards and compression inefficiency, they care about having something that is exactly like GIF, but better. With APNG, that's what PNG becomes.

[kavon89]

Does not work in Google Chrome 3.0.195.27.

[Seq]

Firefox 3.5.3 - yes
Epiphany 2.28.0 - no