(01/09/2010 07:23 PM)Assassinator Wrote:  Even if I had nice internet (will have something not excellent, but decent, soon), waste is always bad (as a matter of principle).  Still don't want to download 120MB of FLAC every 24 minute episode of anime (or even worse, 250MB of 5.1 FLAC).  Also a waste of HDD space.

I would - have heaps and heaps of HDD space that's going to be left there to waste if it isn't used.  Why bother yourself with something which may be substandard?  FLAC guarantees quality, whereas AAC could've been badly encoded (eg uguu batches of Air) and sound absolute poo poo.  Blame the group if you wish, but from the perspective of a user, there's less that could go wrong with FLAC.  (as far as the group is concerned, most people who download BD rips only do so for quality rather than filesize (or uncensoring maybe) so I think FLAC can be justified)
Plus, I can chop out the songs and have nice lossless quality.

(01/09/2010 07:23 PM)Assassinator Wrote:  Heh, wish wee had some better image format than something from 20yrs ago.  Need something equivalent to lets say, x264's intra, then a lot of those problems would be solved.  Actually, there probably is something better, just no good support for it (and i don't mean JPEG2000, that's not really better... well, not strictly anyway).

There are very few encoders for JPEG2000 (are there any free ones?) and support is very limited.
Ultimately, compatibility is king, and there never has really been a need for a better format, so it will be unlikely to change unless something forces it.  Wee still use x86 CPUs because of compatibility.  Wee use Windows because of compatibility.  Both do the job fine, so any reason to change?  Same applies to images.  They're so small and insignificant that no-one particularly cares.  Audio compression is already pretty much like that - MP3 dominates and there's not much significant development otherwise.  FLAC is small enough for many people that it can be considered accessible.
Video, on the other hand, may be considered significantly large to justify codec changes, though Xvid in AVI is still quite popular.

(01/09/2010 07:23 PM)Assassinator Wrote:  Emulator resizing?  Well, most people don't have a need for using this.

No, just a resampling algo.
Upscaling works better if the source is clean (ie not JPEG).

(01/09/2010 07:23 PM)Assassinator Wrote:  If I feed it 24bit in, I expect 24bit out.  That should be natural, it's not something that should (need to) be changed.  If I need to actually change some setting in order for the compressor to return the same bit depth as I gave it, that's obviously the compressor's fault.  Assuming it supports that bit depth ofcourse, but anything that doesn't support 24bit (the most common of them all) is retarded.

As for the application's (Irfanview's) fault, no idea.

I don't think IrfanView does 32bit actually, so it probably is 24bit.