* It's not guaranteed to be patent-free. That's what killed JPEG2000. * It's not significantly better than JPEG2000. * For some it may not be significantly better than old JPEG (notice how many sites still use (non-animated) GIFs although PNG beats them in every way) * AFAIK HDPhoto/WMPhoto can't replace RAW - it's a JPEG killer, not a RAW killer. To kill RAW it would have to be optimised as losless and support all kinds of weird stuff that manufacturers use in their RAWs. * Wherever lossy quality is acceptable, JPEG works just fine (maybe it's not perfect, but good enough and fully interoperable).
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
It won't catch on.
* It's not guaranteed to be patent-free. That's what killed JPEG2000.
* It's not significantly better than JPEG2000.
* For some it may not be significantly better than old JPEG (notice how many sites still use (non-animated) GIFs although PNG beats them in every way)
* AFAIK HDPhoto/WMPhoto can't replace RAW - it's a JPEG killer, not a RAW killer. To kill RAW it would have to be optimised as losless and support all kinds of weird stuff that manufacturers use in their RAWs.
* Wherever lossy quality is acceptable, JPEG works just fine (maybe it's not perfect, but good enough and fully interoperable).