Digital BW, The Print

And good on them.  I hope they profit well from their investment.


> From: "Anthony G. Atkielski" <anthony@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 06:18:56 +0200
> To: "teelions@..." <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Re: New Adobe RAW plugin released
> 
>> Along the same lines:
>> 
>> Adobe is supporting a new universal raw file format called Digital
>> Negative (DNG). More information here:
>> http://www.adobe.com/products/dng/main.html
> 
> Odd that Adobe listed the alleged benefits for photographers and
> hardware/software manufacturers, but failed to list the benefits for
> Adobe, even though they were the only reason for creating the format:
> 
> - Adobe can shore up its flagging profit picture by concocting a
> brand-new "non-proprietary" proprietary file format, knowing that in the
> computer world, whoever brings something first to market becomes the de
> facto owner of it, whether it is technically "open" or not.  (Notice
> that the symbol for the format already carries the "TM" trademark
> assertion, which is a bit strange for something that Adobe claims is
> non-proprietary.)
> 
> - By developing software in secret long before Adboe releases
> specifications, Adobe already has products ready for market and a huge
> head start on other vendors at the time the specs are released.
> 
> - Adobe can encourage the formation of an "open" committee to nourish
> the standard, of which Adobe will of course be the founding and
> controlling member.
> 
> - Adobe can continue to make subtle but incompatible changes to the
> standard as "enhancements," always making sure that its own software is
> modified to handle them _first_, so that other vendors must constantly
> scramble to accommodate the changes.  This gives Adobe ever-increasing
> market share.
> 
> - Adobe can leave the simplest part of the format "non-proprietary," and
> then make a large set of virtually essential enhancements proprietary
> and available only in its own software or under license.  If anyone
> tries to work around this, Adobe will pull a fat list of patents out of
> its hat and threaten the upstart.
> 
> Where do photographers and consumers fit in here?  The answer is, they
> don't.  The whole idea is to make money; that's _always_ the whole idea.
> You're just exchanging one raw, proprietary format for another--that way
> you can pay Adobe money as well as the manufacturer of your camera.
> 
> It amazes me that people still fall for this sort of thing in
> computerland.  Perhaps if Microsoft tried it there would be enough of an
> upswelling of public opinion to make them back down, but too many people
> still trust vendors like Adobe.  I guess they'll learn the hard way.
>