computerworld.com— Microsoft Corp. will soon submit a new photo format to an international standards organization that it says offers higher quality images with better compression, the company said today.
Mar 8, 2007View in Crawl 4
How exactly is submitting a format for approval by an "international standards organization" creating a de facto standard?Seems that they are not trying to become the standard just because they say, but because it is better than the current standard. I would be interested in having more facts as to how much better the compression is and what is the picture quality.It isn't necessary to go into auto-hate mode over everything that Microsoft does.
Note that Microsoft still hasn't actually included HD photo under their 'open specification' promise. They've merely 'promised' to make that promise. :-)This is a good idea from the wrong folks. Every license agreement that MS has written in the last year has specifically forbidden implementation in GPL'd software (just look at the license for MS's PDF replacement 'XPS' - AND THEY WANT THAT PUT IN EVERY PRINTER ON THE MARKET). Microsoft is gunning for every piece of software that you don't have to pay for. This is more of the same.
Exactly. I don't want a prompt telling me that I'm not authorized to print a photo. Or allowed o take a screen shot when a certain photo is on my screen.
Another way to think of it is that PNGs are more like GIFs than JPEGs. (see <a class="user" href="http://www.libpng.org/pub/png/pngfaq.html#jpeg-logo">http://www.libpng.org/pub/png/pngfaq.html#jpeg-logo</a> )And IE has supported PNGs since IE4. They supported transparent PNGs that worked like transparent GIFs, where a pixel is either transparent or opaque. They just didn't support a full alpha channel (where a given pixel can have translucency between transparent and opaque) until IE7.
The end of Microsoft.The whole Planet uses .jpg files inside cameras, .raw if they want even better quality.Web pages use .gif and .jpg - I don't think people want to make their web pages unreadable with microsoft's proprietary image format.We have enough codecs, formats, and file types for sound, video, text, and images.Enough Already!
I'm in favor of this gradually being adopted as long as it is indeed better.Microsoft claimed the same thing about WMA vs MP3, but MP3 sounds much better at the same bitrate.
imjustsayinMar 9, 2007
How exactly is submitting a format for approval by an "international standards organization" creating a de facto standard?Seems that they are not trying to become the standard just because they say, but because it is better than the current standard. I would be interested in having more facts as to how much better the compression is and what is the picture quality.It isn't necessary to go into auto-hate mode over everything that Microsoft does.
countsessineMar 9, 2007
Note that Microsoft still hasn't actually included HD photo under their 'open specification' promise. They've merely 'promised' to make that promise. :-)This is a good idea from the wrong folks. Every license agreement that MS has written in the last year has specifically forbidden implementation in GPL'd software (just look at the license for MS's PDF replacement 'XPS' - AND THEY WANT THAT PUT IN EVERY PRINTER ON THE MARKET). Microsoft is gunning for every piece of software that you don't have to pay for. This is more of the same.
djmolluskMar 9, 2007
Exactly. I don't want a prompt telling me that I'm not authorized to print a photo. Or allowed o take a screen shot when a certain photo is on my screen.
Closed AccountMar 9, 2007
This will kill JPEG like WMA killed MP3.
mdmadphMar 9, 2007
new document formats? you're not one of those who call "Render like WordPerfect 1.0" _open_ are you?
samlMar 10, 2007
Another way to think of it is that PNGs are more like GIFs than JPEGs. (see <a class="user" href="http://www.libpng.org/pub/png/pngfaq.html#jpeg-logo">http://www.libpng.org/pub/png/pngfaq.html#jpeg-logo</a> )And IE has supported PNGs since IE4. They supported transparent PNGs that worked like transparent GIFs, where a pixel is either transparent or opaque. They just didn't support a full alpha channel (where a given pixel can have translucency between transparent and opaque) until IE7.
szandorMar 11, 2007
Oh boy. Another goddamn proprietary format.f**k off, Microsoft. And f**k off all you little shills here on digg.
szandorMar 11, 2007
How is "Let's be cautious..." bashing the product?
hefeMar 12, 2007
"This will kill JPEG like WMA killed MP3."Stole my thunder. ;)
leesoongMar 12, 2007
The end of Microsoft.The whole Planet uses .jpg files inside cameras, .raw if they want even better quality.Web pages use .gif and .jpg - I don't think people want to make their web pages unreadable with microsoft's proprietary image format.We have enough codecs, formats, and file types for sound, video, text, and images.Enough Already!
raptor007Apr 5, 2007
I'm in favor of this gradually being adopted as long as it is indeed better.Microsoft claimed the same thing about WMA vs MP3, but MP3 sounds much better at the same bitrate.
manifestbeautyApr 29, 2007
Microsoft and standards? Please.