Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 15th Dec 2011 16:56 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 500427
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Not too excited by these news
by zima on Thu 22nd Dec 2011 21:15
in reply to "RE[2]: Not too excited by these news"
Well MS essentially encouraged such practices... when some open format* looms, that's what MS discourages (already forgot the circus around OpenDocument & Office "Open" XML?) / they were the ones who insisted on doing things their own way back then, in the times of IE6.
* the place of MRI data is in an open format, able to be reliably read by virtually anything
(anyway, I doubt the situation in question was really that much of a problem, there aren't that many MRI vendors, but there are many tools - also conversion tools - and often free ones, for example http://www.dclunie.com/medical-image-faq/html/
...with some quite ~standard formats (say, Analyze))




Member since:
2010-08-06
I had a experience with a IE6 plugin that made me realise just how expensive and serious the problem can be.
The short version is it involved $6000 worth of MRI scans a surgeon could not read because the scan file only run on a IE6 plugin. Incidently he upgraded from IE6 long time ago.
I was not angry at Microsoft, but at companies that choose to run such files in a browsers based plugin and not updating their plugins.