Who is the author of Kodak or Wang Imaging [Image Editor] and whichlanguage was it written in ?

Discussion in 'C++' started by Rivka Miller, Jan 24, 2012.

  1. Rivka Miller

    Rivka Miller Guest

    Hello Everyone !

    Does any kind soul know the answer to a few simple questions or a way
    to discover them from the program ?

    Who is the author of Kodak or Wang Imaging [Image Editor] and which
    language was it written in ?

    I mean, the name of the software engineer, and not the company.


    I heard that it was originally subcontracted out to UK company and not
    a United States company or a group of programmers.

    Rivka
     
    Rivka Miller, Jan 24, 2012
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Rivka Miller

    Rivka Miller Guest

    Re: Who is the author of Kodak or Wang Imaging [Image Editor] andwhich language was it written in ?

    On Jan 23, 5:37 pm, Rivka Miller <> wrote:
    > Hello Everyone !
    >
    > Does any kind soul know the answer to a few simple questions or a way
    > to discover them from the program ?
    >
    > Who is the author of Kodak or Wang Imaging [Image Editor] and which
    > language was it written in ?
    >
    > I mean, the name of the software engineer, and not the company.
    >
    > I heard that it was originally subcontracted out to UK company and not
    > a United States company or a group of programmers.
    >
    > Rivka



    A little history from some forum for reminder to anyone reading this
    post and interested.


    Mozzy
    Guest
    Posts: n/a

    02-11-2005
    A recent discussion here mentioned XP and Kodak Imaging. I have XP
    so I went and followed some instructions on where to get Kodak
    Imaging.

    Unfortunately the help text didn't come with it, so I am only able to
    assess it slowly.

    No one mentioned if Kodak Imaging is considered good, bad or
    indifferent. Can someone say if it is really worth exploring.



    Reply With Quote

    Mozzy







    Wayne Fulton
    Guest
    Posts: n/a

    02-11-2005
    In article <95FA86D6BD8351A7E@130.133.1.4>, says...
    >
    >
    >A recent discussion here mentioned XP and Kodak Imaging. I have XP
    >so I went and followed some instructions on where to get Kodak
    >Imaging.
    >
    >Unfortunately the help text didn't come with it, so I am only able to
    >assess it slowly.
    >
    >No one mentioned if Kodak Imaging is considered good, bad or
    >indifferent. Can someone say if it is really worth exploring.



    It probably depends on what you got, and what you will use it for.

    Kodak Imaging was included as part of Win98 and WinME, at menu Start -
    Programs - Accessories - Imaging. It was in all Windows until XP, but
    it is NOT in WinXP - XP has its own Picture and Fax Viewer instead,
    which only shows and prints. Imaging was a document program, for
    documents, more so than for photos... multipage TIF, etc (even reads
    multipage XIF files). It would read and write photos in TIF or JPG
    format, but it had no photo editing powers. In Windows, this free
    version was a minimal version, not the full version, which sells for
    about $170.

    It was Wang Imaging in Win95, before Kodak bought it from Wang. Then
    it
    changed to Eastman Imaging called eiStream, but now its home is at
    http://www.global360.com

    The full version was considered pretty strong for documents. It is
    more
    for business document applications. I have to think if you want a
    photo
    editor, then something like Elements or Paint Shop Pro would be a much
    better buy. In turn however, these dont do documents well.

    --
    Wayne
    http://www.scantips.com "A few scanning tips"



    Reply With Quote

    Wayne Fulton

    Mozzy
    Guest
    Posts: n/a

    02-11-2005
    On 11 Feb 2005, Wayne Fulton wrote:

    > It was Wang Imaging in Win95, before Kodak bought it from Wang.
    > Then it changed to Eastman Imaging called eiStream, but now its
    > home is at http://www.global360.com


    I see that Kodak Imaging gets installed into this folder:
    C:\Program Files\Windows NT\Accessories\ImageVue

    Also I notice that INF file to install Kodak Imaging (in Win2000) is
    called IMAGEVUE.INF.

    I guess this means that ImageVue is yet another name for "Kodak
    Imaging for Windows".

    So these seem to be equivalent:

    "Wang Imaging"
    "Eastman Software Imaging"
    "Kodak Imaging"
    "ImageVue"
    "eiStream"
    "eiStream Global 360"

    Phew!


    Reply With Quote

    Mozzy

    Wayne Fulton
    Guest
    Posts: n/a

    02-11-2005
    In article <95FA85B662F4351A7E@130.133.1.4>, says...

    >So these seem to be equivalent:
    >
    > "Wang Imaging"
    > "Eastman Software Imaging"
    > "Kodak Imaging"
    > "ImageVue"
    > "eiStream"
    > "eiStream Global 360"



    Except I think not the same version. The free Windows versions were a
    very light version of the purchased full version.

    --
    Wayne
    http://www.scantips.com "A few scanning tips"



    Reply With Quote

    Wayne Fulton

    Newron
    Guest
    Posts: n/a

    02-11-2005
    Greetings Mozzy,

    Actually, the Kodak Imaging program, which is included with the MS
    Operating
    Systems from 95 to Me and I believe Win2000, was created by Kodak and
    given
    to MS for use in their OS. Wang Labs was the originator and Kodak
    bought
    part of the company that created that software. It has been in use for
    a
    long time now.

    XP does not include Kodak IMG but uses MS own viewer etc.

    If you are talking about some other feature or software program, let
    me know
    and I will track it down for you.

    Talk to you soon,

    Ron Baird
    Eastman Kodak Company


    "Mozzy" <> wrote in message
    news:95FA86D6BD8351A7E@130.133.1.4...
    >A recent discussion here mentioned XP and Kodak Imaging. I have XP
    > so I went and followed some instructions on where to get Kodak
    > Imaging.
    >
    > Unfortunately the help text didn't come with it, so I am only able to
    > assess it slowly.
    >
    > No one mentioned if Kodak Imaging is considered good, bad or
    > indifferent. Can someone say if it is really worth exploring.
    >
     
    Rivka Miller, Jan 24, 2012
    #2
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.

Share This Page