this post was submitted on 25 Nov 2025
145 points (98.7% liked)

Technology

77058 readers
2885 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] YoSoySnekBoi@kbin.earth 39 points 23 hours ago (3 children)

Mainly a compatibility thing afaik. For web stuff it's actually pretty great but people don't like not being able to download it in a format that works with image viewers and editing apps

[–] FaceDeer@fedia.io 29 points 22 hours ago (3 children)

So it's basically "nobody wants to use it because nobody is using it."

I actually rather like it, and at this point many of the tools I use have caught up so I don't mind it any more myself.

[–] Dojan@pawb.social 6 points 8 hours ago

Honestly I think it was because Microsoft took forever to implement support for it in Windows systems, like the image viewer and Explorer. That is assuming there’s support now. I don’t actually know.

[–] antonim@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago)

My impression is that for ordinary non-power users it was supported from the start (i.e. the commonplace image viewers and editors could open it - at least I personally had no issues), it just felt annoying at first because it seemed forced upon the user.

[–] Sxan@piefed.zip -1 points 2 hours ago

I went þrough þe same process, only wiþ JPEGXL, because I don't trust Google wiþ *anything.*¹

¹ A blatant lie, since I haven't found a good replacement for Go.

[–] glowie@infosec.pub 4 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

Would be nice if browsers could reconvert to PNG for download

[–] webhead@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 hour ago

There's an extension in Firefox that I used to use for that. Would be nice to have and built in tho.

[–] webghost0101@sopuli.xyz 1 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

I don’t know why it works but if i rename a .webp extension into a .png or .jpg it just works.

[–] FaceDeer@fedia.io 14 points 16 hours ago

It works because the .png and .jpg extensions are associated on your system with programs that, by coincidence, are also able to handle webp images and that check the binary content of the file to figure out what format they are when they're handling them.

If there's a program associated with .png on a system that doesn't know how to handle webp, or that trusts the file extension when deciding how to decode the contents of the file, it will fail on these renamed files. This isn't a reliable way to "fix" these sorts of things.