The world is ready for a new photo compression format to rival the ubiquitous JPEG, according to readers of ZDNet UK sister site CNET News.com.
But they're not so sure it should be a Microsoft product such as the new Windows Media Photo format, which promises better quality images at half the size of JPEG files.
In a poll asking whether a JPEG competitor is needed, almost half of the 5,621 voters expressed interest in a new format but voiced concern "about it being a Microsoft product".
About 20 percent said yes, "email and Web pages need smaller files", while about 30 percent voted no, "JPEG works just fine".
The poll was in response to a story on the demonstration of Windows Media Photo last week at the Windows Hardware Engineering Conference. The compression technology will be supported in Windows Vista and made available for Windows XP.
The 135 reader comments on the story seemed to mirror the poll results. Many agreed that new technology is a good thing but can't get beyond its maker.
One reader wrote: "In the case of Microsoft, the concern must be, given Microsoft's abusive track record, pre-eminently the 'who', and not the how or what of a proposed technology. Anyone who understands the usefulness of innovations such as the Web and the Internet must be wary of any proposed Microsoft 'standard'."
Reader Peter Simpson added that no matter what the benefits of Windows Media Photo are, he's concerned about Redmond's "strong affinity for proprietary formats encumbered by Digital Restrictions Management".
He wrote: "I'm concerned that, sometime in the future, Microsoft may hold my photos for ransom, requiring that I purchase an upgrade to view them. Or, even worse, that Microsoft may drop support for the format; and since it's proprietary, there wouldn't be any other viewers available."
A reader who went by the name 'JohnUSA', said he'll only use the new format if it's proven without any doubt to be superior to JPEG, if it's completely free, forever, and if it's "without any strings or conditions or any **** that Microsoft may throw at its users". He added: "Simply put, I never, never trust Microsoft."
But another reader said it's time naysayers stop focusing on "nonsense argumentative junk such as the 'evil' Microsoft monopolies, 'open source is better' crap and lame positions that other alternatives exists so why bother".
The reader wrote: "Let's be sober here in saying that anybody arguing that this isn't going to be a new standard, must be disillusioned. It will be a standard simply because Microsoft is going to have all its operating systems (XP and on) support it. Moreover and more importantly, Internet Explorer will support it (which is the undeniable king of the browsers when it comes to market penetration)."
Talkback
With the vast increase in data storage technology over the past few years, allowing not only more data to be stored, but data to be transferred at huge speeds, it begs the question as to whether a new format is actually needed to replace JPEG. It is not uncommon to still come across images with an inferior compression to JPEG, such as BMP or GIF, obviously the user didn't see the need to save space, as it is becoming so cheap and cheerful. However if a new picture format is required, it would certainly need to be open source. A Microsoft picture format is simply out of the question, given the company's history, and large and numerous anti-trust court battles they are involved in worldwide. The digital rights management built into "Windows Media Video" and XBox Propriatory Sound Track Files (that the user rips from CD's) should be clear warnings that Microsoft are not in the business of "open standards"! I recommend all IT Departments boycott any new Microsoft proprietory image format or they may end up facing problems down the line!
It may work out like "VB Script" on web pages. At one point that was touted as "the way to go" but people stuck with javascript.
As a web developer I would not use it. The chances of a high proportion of visitors to a website not being able to view the image because "only Vista/IE7 supports it" would finish it for me.
No doubt, everything Microsoft publishes for the first year after Vista will be issued in the new format to force us all to upgrade, but they can't (won't?) even implement PNG correctly so that doesn't bode well for "openness"
No doubt they'll keep the format secret or else some enterprising legal troll will turn up and start yelling about patent infringement. It has happened to JPG, GIF and PNG so why should this one be any different?
Of course, maybe there will be some really, really clever feature that makes the whole thing work brilliantly and we'll all be gasping to use it......
New JPEG pointless. The days of Ms setting any standards are over - some people might not remember but WMA was developed to eliminate Mp3's because it was 'so much better!"
It didn't happen there - it's definitely not happening with jpeg's.
jpeg is here to stay - as others have pointed out, with storage & broadband, a file being 100k or 1 MB hardly matters anymore so no one cares.
But that's MS for you - instead of updating their OS, they are busy trying to grab another few micro-payments of royalties. Didn't work for Mp3's, and it's not going to work for JPEG.
MS is the new IBM. It's there but if it doesn't play nicely with the real standards, they're irrelevant.
Microsoft has made the Windows Media Photo format public - however the compression algorithm is only obtainable through a license. Currently, there's no fee for that license, but you do have to present an argument as to why you should have access to it.
To me, the issue is simple. If we have a compression algorithm that is proprietary, how will we migrate this format to other platforms - or preserve our assets should Microsoft decide to abandon this format or compression algorithm.
When Microsoft publishes their algorithm in a patent free or free license, I'll consider this. Until then, JPEG or PNG is fine. As other's have noted, storage and bandwidth just aren't the issue they used to be. I'm not going to risk losing access to my own assets for a small gain.
Usually people who are restricted to the 'one way or no way' mentality are considered (drug) addicts that require non-public treatment. As such one has to wonder about those who can only see one way to resolve their problems. Certainly those who can only see one way despite all odds, reasoning and what not.