I’m not quite sure of your question, but I’ll try to offer an answer. Microsoft, of course, wields a great deal of influence in the marketplace. I would offer that the medical imaging industry (with its adoption of JPEG2000 as part of the DICOM standard) and the motion picture industry (with Motion JPEG2000 as the way studios deliver movies to theaters following the DCI guidelines) have a weight as well.

For the industry that I’m involved in — academic libraries and cultural heritage institutions — I like how JPEG2000 is more of an open standard. It was created that way — not something that was dreamed up by a corporation and offered to a standards body. And where Microsoft HD Photo format is “simpler” than JPEG2000 (as has been argued by some), the complexity that we get with JPEG2000 involves important things like color mapping.

There is probably enough to say about a JPEG2000 versus Microsoft HD Photo formats than would comfortably fit in this comment. Perhaps if I have enough time over the next few days I’ll try to piece it together — no promises, though, because I already owe a public commentary here describing the disruptive forces impacting academic libraries.