Firefox Destupidification, Take #1
Have you ever noticed that sometimes Firefox saves the image files as WEBP, even when that image has the extension JPG? Well, that’s stupid, but you can change that.
Using Firefox for the shitty browser of choice, go for instance to this web page. Open one of the images in a different tab, say shiny-brite-pink-chirstmas-tree-9.jpg.
Now try saving it as a file. Chances are, instead of shiny-brite-pink-chirstmas-tree-9.jpg, you’d get shiny-brite-pink-chirstmas-tree-9.webp!
There’s this reddit thread, Why Does Firefox Save Every Image as WebP?
Just as the title says. The only way I can get Firefox to NOT download JPEGs and PNGs as webp is to right-click, view image, and make sure there is nothing after the file extension in the URI. What’s going on here? Why would Firefox change the extension like this?
Searching for this problem I see people are blaming the web developers, but if a web developer sends a JPEG as a WebP, but then the extension says JPG, why would Firefox not just do the right thing and save the file as the extension I actually want it as?
The first answer (sorted by “Best first”) gives you the solution:
Firefox doesn’t have a converter: when you save, you are saving what Firefox received.
This problem is caused by server farms and content distribution networks optimizing for bandwidth. If a browser signals support for WebP, then the server will apply WebP compression on the fly to JPEG and PNG files without changing the file name or extension. This is transparent to you when viewing the page because Firefox can decode WebP compression. However, it does mean that the image cannot be saved in the original format because Firefox doesn’t have it.
Could I suggest trying my extension? It strips off the signal that Firefox likes WebP-format images, which should discourage servers from using the extra compression on JPEG and PNG images.
More info: https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/addon/dont-accept-webp/
Indeed, while Firefox is “smart” to support WebP, it’s actually stupid to do so.
I DO NOT WANT WEBP FILES, YOU MOTHERFUCKERS OF THE UNIVERSE!
In Windows, if you have Firefox installed as the default browser, any WebP file will open in Firefox!
In Linux, I noticed that WebP files are not supported by:
- the default image viewer in XFCE, namely Ristretto
- the default image viewer in MATE, namely Eye of MATE (
The stupid thing is that the MATE team has forked Eye of GNOME (
eog) from GNOME 2, but they didn’t fork gThumb, which has the following advantages:
- gThumb is the lightest GTK-based image viewer to offer decent image editing
- gThumb is the lightest GTK-based image viewer to support WebP
Oh, well. I can fix the WebP annoyance by installing gThumb (which is one of my must-have apps in Linux!), BUT I STILL DON’T WANT THIS FUCKING WEBP SHIT!
If they want to save bandwidth, instead of saving 15% by converting JPG to WEBP, they should use web pages that have most of the content useful content, not huge JS crap!
Here’s the breakdown of an ArsTechnica page, chosen to have images in the article, and with comments enabled (to have more HTML):
Now, let’s consider The Guardian. Take a random page, and analyze it:
80% is JS, and less than 3% is images! The images are only taking 0.15 MB, while the JS is taking 4.2 MB! How come? Because the retards at The Guardian are using JPEGs with Q=45!
Open any image from their website and examine the end of the URL:
They made savings in the wrong department. Either way, fuck WebP!
To get JPG instead of WebP, Firefox must claim it doesn’t support WebP, and the simplest way to accomplish that is to install the extension Don’t “Accept” image/webp, by jscher2000 (who also offers a converter):
Why are they constantly screwing the Internet?
Heu, on ne peut rien changer simplement dans about:config, sans le besoin d’une extension supplémentaire ? Il doit y avoir au moins une entrée pour ca, non ?
I suppose you could disable image.webp.enabled; however, with this extension, WebP files are rejected even with this option enabled!
OK. Mais il y a déjà suffisamment d’extensions, si ça peut se faire simplement directement dans le browser, pourquoi rajouter quelque chose d’extérieur ? D’autant que les extensions peuvent être des trous de sécurité et privacy 😉
Qu’en est-il de Chrome/Chromium ? A-t’il le même comportement ?
Pour Chrome/Chromium peut-être cette extension peut être utile : WebP image converter.
Peut-être celle-ci aussi qui permet de les “repérer” 🙂 : WebP Highlighter.
« Celui qui trouve une image WebP a trouvé le bonheur ; c’est une faveur qu’il a reçue de l’Éternel Google. » (Proverbes 18:22, édition âge Internet)
> you could disable image.webp.enabled
Cela semble marcher. Donc pas besoin d’une extension, cool 🙂
A moins que changer ce paramètre puisse poser un autre problème ? Quoi que je ne vois pas lequel à priori.
A Firefox update might reset image.webp.enabled to true without the user realizing it. Keeping this add-on active (I never knew what’s the difference between an extension and an add-on) ensures the peace of mind 🙂
Wow, thank you for this write-up! I have noticed that a few images in the wild are .webp format. I haven’t yet noticed (with an old fork of Firefox) that .jpg files are actually of format .webp, but I will keep it in mind!
Some websites refuse to serve the JPGs as JPGs, even with this extension! Take for example this page. With this extension enabled, this image, despite having the extension JPG, is received as WEBP!
However, if you go to about:config and set image.webp.enabled to false, the result will be deceiving:
1. The JPG will still arrive as WEBP.
2. The webpage will display white areas instead of the JPGs that arrive as WEBPs, because now Firefox has completely disabled the WEBP support, including the ability to display them!
As a proof, if you try opening this image in a separate tab, Firefox won’t display it, but it will download it! With the JPG extension, but try opening it with an image viewer and you’ll see it’s WEBP inside.
BOTTOM LINE: Better use the extension rather changing image.webp.enabled; this way, if some site only sends WEBP images, you’ll still be able to see them!
Wow, quelle saloperie. Sinon, dans la mesure du possible, peut-être simplement boycotter les crétins de sites qui ont ce comportement.
Pourquoi ne pas boycotter l’internet dans son intégralité ?
Pamela Jones (Groklaw), Tuesday, August 20, 2013: Forced Exposure ~pj:
Boycotter l’internet ? Pas bête, mais alors nous manquerions les quelques trucs intéressants qui s’y trouvent, notamment votre intéressant et très instructif blog.
Does anyone know of an extension, with the same or similar function, that will work with Firefox ESR 52.9.0 (32-bit)??