JPEG2000 Coming Soon 489
Sonny writes "In a few months time, internet users will be able to make use of the JPEG2000 standard which, its developers claim, enables web graphics to be downloaded much faster than is currently possible. This will not only make graphics-heavy web pages easier to download, it will also preserve image quality. The JPEG standard compresses image files which are then transmitted across the web faster than uncompressed files. Now, researchers at universities around the world have developed JPEG2000, the next-generation image-compression technology under the auspices of the International Standards Organisation. It is the first major upgrade of the standard since it first appeared in the early '90s. What is also important about the technology is its ability to send files without loss of data, which is not the case with current JPEG files. To take advantage of a JPEG2000, web browsers will need a Plug-In for either Internet Explorer or Netscape browsers. These free plug-in's are expected to be available later this year. The extension for the new files will be ".jp2"."
Wow! (Score:5, Funny)
Excellent! (Score:4, Funny)
Oh, and FP, BITCHES!
The most useful and widely used benefit (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Wow! (Score:4, Funny)
Slogan for JPEG2000... (Score:1, Funny)
free bandwidth (Score:5, Funny)
excellent, using jpeg2000 increases my bandwidth too!
There I was thinking they downloaded at the same speed but in less time!
Uses new compression standard (Score:5, Funny)
Re:JPEG does have a lossless mode (Score:3, Funny)
Horray for wavelets! Now if only someone would re-explain them to me. I didn't catch it the first time and no one has said anything high level enough since (I'm not interested in the nitty gritty at this point)
Re:Stupid extensions (Score:1, Funny)
file extensions (Score:2, Funny)
I wonder what the Pope thinks about the file extensions being callled
Re:Smart Extensions (Score:5, Funny)
A few characters per file name - yes those couple of bytes will save gobs of bandwidth.
2. Easier to type.
How often do you actually type file names? I do it once - when I create the file, I think I can afford the few seconds.
3. Backward compatability.
With what??? I am willing to bet that whatever you dig up that requires 8.3 will not be compatible with the actual file format.
I cringe when I see people have named the file some big long gobbledegook like bobbys_8th_book_report.doc when bookrep8.doc would have done just fine.
Yes, that's a stupid name, and no bookrep8.doc is not better. Who numbers their bloody book reports? I think little bobby will get a bit confused a few years down the road when he gets to bookrp48.doc How about "steppenwolf report.doc"? or "glass bead game report.doc", I really do think I see how these are better than stpwlfrp.doc and glbegarp.doc
Re:Interesting point. (Score:3, Funny)
> want your users not being able to use your site.
Judging by the state of usability of the vast majority of sites, I'm thinking that most companies couldn't care less whether people can use their sites or not.
Re:What happened to DjVu? (Score:2, Funny)
Anyone else noticed... (Score:1, Funny)