BREAKING NEWS: The end of JPEG is in sight

Methinks the original spamming perp hasn't seen JPEG2000 yet. Man, when is
that EVER going to catch on?

In rec.photo.digital Lorem Ipsum wrote:

Methinks the original spamming perp hasn't seen JPEG2000 yet.
Man, when is that EVER going to catch on?

Perhaps never. Do you use it? I don't.

Camera manufacturers do not support it in cameras, because
RAW seems to be a better alternative for them.

For archiving, lossless JPEG 2000 is a bit smaller than PNG,
but much less universal, and it is slow to encode/decode.
Photoshoppers might prefer to archive PCD with adjustment layers.

For "high" quality web images [sic], even if JPEG 2000 were
widely supported in browsers, it doesn't look much better
than quality 85-95 (IJG scale) with 1x1 chroma subsampling,
and doesn't save much additional space.

For low quality web images, JPEG 2000 does produce smaller
and better looking files. That seems like a very small win
considering the hype and proprietary dead-end.

I would be happy to hear arguments to the contrary.