Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Finds a Home For Barcode
MicroBarcode writes in about the color barcode technology that Microsoft developed but shelved two years back because nobody adopted it. The technology promised a way to link packaging to Web sites — and once cell phone cameras get good enough, Microsoft hoped lots of people would use it. It seems the technology has finally found a home: the ISAN International Agency has inked a deal with Microsoft. The color barcodes, consisting of red, green, yellow, and black triangles, will appear on XBox 360 games and other products beginning later this year.
Once the group starts issuing the barcodes, studios and producers will be able to link their Web sites to that database. One day, consumers might use a digital camera to "scan" barcodes on DVD cases, in advertisements and on billboards, then be transported to a Web page to watch trailers or buy products.
So, what you're telling us is that this is nothing but a pointless technology and that it would be much easier just to post a URL?
I have a to take a picture, possibly be charged depending on my mobile plan and if I choose that route, and then be tracked by Microsoft and the end company and then go to a website that would have been easier to just type in?
Right. Dumb.
It was called the "CueCat".
Sounds exactly like the CueCat.
Which, of course, sucked. One article about it from several years ago said something like:
"It fails to solve a problem that doesn't exist."
Only place where I see this applicable is: - take picture of a movie box in shop - upload tag to torrent search site - download results - profit! No need for ... even.
The CueCat was a piece of free hardware that was hacked. This wouldn't require the passing out of any hardware that could be taken advantage of.
Microsoft may have invented the Internet and the computer, but sometimes they do some really stupid shit.
They already have this in Japan. Just take a picture of the QR code with your cell phone camera and you'll get all sorts of info about the product. See here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QR_Code
-- dbg
A better implementation exists, one that is not controlled by a convicted illegal monopolist: Semacode.
It uses Datamatrix 2-D (monochrome) barcodes to encode URLs on paper billboards and flyers, and has scanner implementations for many cellphones w/ built-in cameras.
In a prototypical application, a typical college student sees an advertisement attached to a bulletin board, for a local concert of Local Rock Band XYZ. There is a semacode symbol on the poster. He or she, uses cell phone to take a picture of the link, which automatically launches the cell's built in web browser to that URL (saving much tedious thumb-typing), and purchases concert tickets instantaneously.
http://semacode.org/
I can throw as many stones as I wish; my house is made of transparent aluminum.
Sure, we all say Bill Gates is the Antichrist, but I never thought it was true until now!
You're anti-MS zealotry is clouding your mind.
Look. It's just like the QR Codes in Japan. What makes them so special is that you can encode much, much more data into them than a typical barcode (the blac&white QR codes can hold about 3KB, I assume this color version can do better). This lets you encode a ton more data about a product than w/ a typical barcode.
Basically it holds all of the promise of RFID with none of the scary privacy issues. But this is slashdot, so I realize I must spin this as evil. DIE MICROSOFT DIE! There, happy?
While there are markers so that the orientation can be determined by scanners, there's no way to extend this encoding along the length of a package in any relatively inconspicuous manner the way that ISO/IEC 15416 codes do. This is the same problem which has prevented mass adoption of the Datamatrix 2D code outside of specific areas such as postage and shipping which simply needed to include the additional data required.
This is an interesting system and even more capable than Datamatrix and ShotCode of encoding a lot of information in a limited area. Unfortunately it suffers not only from requiring higher printing specs for those who use it (reflectance is of utmost importance; see here) but also from a return to a less usable system in key areas. This is for retail packaging but it will slow (or prevent speeding up of) standard, real-life usage.
Yes, it would be possible to place multiple copies of the code along the length of some item, but the colour factor as well as the required resolution don't allow for interruptions and additional area uses that the current lengthwise 1D barcodes do.
Not unless by "a ton" you mean twice as much, it's four colors instead of two. At the cost of a totally incompatible system.
We have had labels with two-dimensional scan codes for years. These can be printed in any laser printer and scanned in a monochrome scanner. Software for those is everywhere it's needed, inventory systems have it, point-of-sale systems have it.
Why replace something that has been working fine? It's that old Microsoft tactic of inventing a new "standard" way of doing things and pushing its monopolistic muscle to squeeze other companies out of the business.
I for one hope they don't adopt MS's color-coded triangles. I don't care how much more data it can encode. It'll still be worthless to me since those of us that are color-blind can't read it.
There's also an article about this over on BBC News with more information: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6570871.stm It appears it's not an attempt to replace the traditional UPC barcode.
/. we should all assume that the new barcode is just another phase of Microsoft's Plan of World Domination, right?
From the article:
Gavin Jancke, the Microsoft Research engineering director who developed the so-called High Capacity Color Barcode (HCCB), said the aim was not to replace the current barcode system, called UPC. "It's more of a 'partner' barcode," he said. "The UPC barcodes will always be there. Ours is more of a niche barcode where you want to put a lot of information in a small space."
Of course, since this is
1. Create picture with a barcode URL to a malware site .........
2. Post on flickr, youtube, et al
3. Wait for someone wearing glasses to visit the image
4. Let MS's automagical software see the barcode in the reflection in the user's glasses via the PC's
5.
6. Profit.
This is the visual equivalent of the exploit that uses an audiofile to tell the voice recognition software to do things.
Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.
I take pictures of the "now playing" line on our music server for future reference. It's not really any different than that.
Entering text on a cell phone is a real pain in the ass and it's often the only device I have around me capable of recording data while 'out on the town'
Take for instance google maps. I'll often take a photo of a google map before driving just so that I can look at it later on my cell phone. Much cheaper than GPS. Imagine if you will if Google Maps could encode all of your driving directions into a little 2"x2" square barcode on your screen. Then you just snap a picture with your cell phone. The Cell Phone includes a text decoder which then decodes the driving directions for when you need them later.
Let's say you're in frys and you see a new 500 GB HDD for $220. Now you start thinking to yourself... "Is this a good deal?" but you can't remember what the going rate is. No problem you snap a photo of the barcode and you've already set up an association with product names and your favorite price grabber search engine and presto there it is on New Egg for $180 shipped.
Let's say you're in a big city and you're lost. No problem! Just snap a photo of the nearest street sign's colorful barcode and presto google maps (your chosen default map service) locates where you are. You already while at home scanned the barcode for the address of your hotel and google gives you new directions from where you are.
The problem with cuecat was that all it did was awkwardly enter URLs onto your PC. When you're on your PC there is no need for barcode scanners you already have an amazing data entry tool... your keyboard! Cellphones have no easy way to enter in a lot of information.
I doubt microsoft's lone solution will be the only survivor, but who cares! With a camera based system, you can have hundreds of competing formats on your cell phone. But the better compressed the data, the more likely it is to catch on because the more information it can convey.
I for one welcome our new barcode speaking overloads.