> Cannot be used in the majority of web browsers.
Define "majority". All of the libre Web browsers I'm aware of are under
GPL-compatible licenses. Firefox's compatibility is indirect, but all Mozilla
would have to do to be able to use FLIF, assuming it stays under the GPL, is
dual-license Firefox under both the MPL 2.0 and the GPL, which they can
easily do thanks to the MPL's terms. (They could even just stick with the
GPL, though they probably wouldn't do that.)
Of course proprietary browsers can't use it (without re-implementing it), but
who cares? The only negative effect that can result from this is people
continuing to use PNG rather than switching over to FLIF.
> Cannot be used in the majority of photo viewers.
Citation needed. gThumb is under the GNU GPL. And if you're talking about
proprietary photo viewers, again, so what? Then we get the benefits of FLIF,
and proprietary photo viewers don't.
> Cannot be used in the majority of photo editors.
So, you need to use a libre image editor, like the GIMP, to export it, giving
these editors an advantage over proprietary image editors. That sounds like a
good deal to me!
> Cannot be used in phones, tablets, and cameras.
That's just over-generalizing. Not all phones and tablets run iOS. Can most
cameras' software even be updated in the first place?
But again, if a camera can use FLIF, great for it! That means storing the
pictures in a lossless format. If they can't? Well, they'll just continue to
use JPEG. And nothing of value was lost.
