Opinion on it?
>>110211380extremely basedfuck the retarded thing chrome does when you save .html and it gives you the weird folder that moves around by itself and breaks if you try to upload it anywhere
>>110211385>fuck the retarded thing chrome doesSir I made these files using Brave(a skin for chrome)!>fuck the retarded thing chrome does when you save .html and it gives you the weird folder that moves around by itself and breaksI actually preferred this method back in the day because it let you save SWF files from newgrounds.comThe problem with it is that it is slow as shit while this one is turbo fast(EXPLAIN THAT ONE TURING!)And for some fucken reason some websites never include pictures in the HTML version(like sad panda) while the same page in the same browser saved as MTML has all the pictures in it (EXPLAIN THAT ONE TURING!)The other benefit is if you want to have the MHTM file in the same folder as another set of files and it can get bloated with the extra folder.The other benefit is that sometimes th folder setup get file paths who are to long since some dev added it or whatever inside the server.The downside is that MHTML is spyware open that one up in notepad and have a look! It includes information like when you saved it.
>>110211385... literally just choose the mhtml option from the save as menu then? chromium has it as well, retard.Firefox is actually the only browser that requires an extension to do it
>>110211690I remember when Mozilla was trying to make their own zip based format made it a option, then a plugin and then abandoned it when they made quantum and it is ultra dead. I still saved websites in that Mozilla shit who I need to retrieve LOL!https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Archive_Format
>>110211380Comfy. For Firefox and friends I use Save Page WE, which is even comfier, but I wish it was a feature that was just baked into the browser. >>110211922This was great when it was alive, but Save Page and SingleFile are now far more efficient, and they produce files which can be opened by any web browser, without extensions.
>>110213970>For FirefoxNo one uses FF. I am a ex-FF user let this trash browser die.>>110213970>This was great when it was alive, but Save Page and SingleFile are now far more efficient, and they produce files which can be opened by any web browser, without extensions.Oh zoomer! Oh zoom zoom!MHTML is the only way internet explorer saved web pages back in the day. You knew this if you used internet explorer back in the day!How history repeats itself!The point is that all kinds of meme formats can be abandoned however a real HTML file will never be because at this point the browser will stop supporting any web page making is useless to even brows the internet.
>>110214121>internet explorer>You knew this if you used internet explorerA. Internet explorer was not mentioned in the post, or on the entire chain that you're replying to.The post you are quoting says that mhtml is comfy, and that maff was comfy, but that using extensions like SingleFile and SavePage are comfier, and offer broader compatibility in terms of what browsers can open the content. Your post is essentially a non-sequitur.B. Your post is also flat out wrong. MHTML was not the only way IE saved pages "back in the day". You would know this if you weren't a larping zoomer (see: ctrl-f mhtml on https://web.archive.org/web/20041102082445/http://support.microsoft.com/kb/221787 ).C. All of these save methods and container formats are pretty similar under the hood, and you are a gay ESL nigger tween from Africa.
>>110211380idk
>>110211463mhtml is a container, you can strip the swfs from it just like if they were saved the way Chrome does it. When downloading SWFs was actually a thing Firefox had a better option than either of those, I don't know if Chrome had/has a counterpart. You could right click and view page info, then get a list of all the images, icons, swfs, etc. from the media tab and download them individually
literally just used this format for the first time the other day when mr. clanker couldn't access a webpage and the options were either a screenshot, print to pdf, or this save as single file mhtml thing that i noticed for the first time ever, is it a new format? anyway it's way better than the last time i tried to save a page years ago and got a folder full of bullshit
>>110216854It's at least relatively old, I remember saving sites in that format in Opera 12 around 10 years ago
>>110216897figures i'm just a dummy for never noticing it the few times i've ever wanted to save a webpage. ..actually skimming through the thread and checking my browsers the likelier answer is i was using firefox at the time so it was never there to notice
>>110216833>you can strip the swfs from it jHOW?!The use-FF-to-save-newgrounds.com was simple and it worked!
>>110216936>figures i'm just a dummy for never noticing it the few times i've ever wanted to save a webpage>the few times i've ever wanted to save a webpage!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1111Trigered!Then what do you do? Only consume? The biggest aspect of the early internet was saving content and the big war once YT started restricting the ability to save video.
>>110217362Well the easiest way is opening it with your browser and doing it the way you should have in the first place
>>110217420>and doing it the way you should have in the first place?????WTF did you mean by that? There is no save option in the browser for SWF. Right clicking does not give a save option only that flash-player menu with possible author customization.
