Talk:IMG (file format)

Untitled
This article is completely wrong. The .img format is a Macintosh disk image format. The thing you want to describe in this article is just a raw dump, possible with any unix block device. It's mostly created with the command dd (Unix). Yes, .img (not .IMG ... Unix is case sensitive, UPPERCASE is only used on DOS, not even on Windows) is the most common file extension, but also .dd is, or maybe it's something like .144 or .hd dependent on the disk. But it's not a file format ... just a raw copy of the filesystem, without any format. --88.70.49.10 (talk) 10:13, 25 May 2008 (UTC) (User Saski in German Wikipedia)
 * "Raw dump" also is kind of a format - an easy one ;-) --Arilou (talk) 16:49, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

And it IS compatible with IMA format by WinImage, as they are the same. Extension .dd is seldomly found on Unix, never anywhere else. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.44.162.92 (talk) 17:19, 30 October 2008


 * Then please rewrite it accordingly. Be bold'. --Joshua Issac (talk) 15:11, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

DiskDupe
DiskDupe uses extension .ddi, not .img.--218.102.95.31 (talk) 18:43, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Bitmap image format
An IMG file, also known as GEM Raster Image, is the native bitmap image format for Graphical_Environment_Manager. You can find its description here. Do not confuse with *.GEM files (these are native metafiles of the same OS). Mamurra (talk) 18:54, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Incorrect
This is not correct. ISO refers to a file format and IMG files are not the same. That Nero, or some other application can treat them the same way from the user standpoint isn't relevant. (More to follow).--Kernel.package (talk) 16:29, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Accessing and converting non-standard obsolete IMG formats
''I added the following text but decided to remove it as it doesn't address the issue of floppies in pre-MS-DOS formats (the many CP/M formats, for example, not all of which can be handled by PC drives). I don't know if sources are available; and I don't think there is a straightforward method simple enough for anyone to try to support the text. If anyone thinks any of this belongs in the article, here it is - feel free.''

Accessing old floppy images in proprietary non-raw format on modern hardware can be problematical. There are some programs such as dd, a command-line program originally for Unix but ported to Microsoft Windows, which can convert images between many formats, although the syntax is rather complex. Alternatively the original program, if available, can be used either to create a physical floppy which can be used directly or re-encoded in standard raw format. Or a virtual machine can be used without the need for a physical floppy drive or a computer system capable of running the software; VMware Player, for example, can mount a raw floppy image into a virtual drive A:, and the imaging program can "write" the image to the virtual floppy, thereby creating a raw image from the non-standard file. the virtual machine used must run an operating system that supports the imaging program, which may be an older Windows, Linux, MS-DOS, or any other operating system supported by the virtual hardware.

GNU RaWrite and RaWrite 2
I can't find any information on the internet about Gnu RaWrite, does it exist? I can only find rawrite as DOS program. --Stijn Brouwer (talk) 15:14, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Ok, I found RaWrite 2, but it isn't from GNU, it's licensed under the GNU license. --Stijn Brouwer (talk) 15:14, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Someone needs to fix this mess!

 * The disambiguation page linking here says IMG (file format), the file extension of several different image formats.
 * The actual article says refers to binary files with .img filename extension that store raw disk images of floppy disks, hard drives, or optical discs

WELL WHAT IS IT? An image format or a raw format? Personally I know it is both but this page makes a mess of it all.

I suggest creating another article focused on the image format(s) and this article dedicated to the raw format. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Schalice (talk • contribs) 05:31, 13 November 2013 (UTC)


 * I agree that the disambiguation page is inconsistent with the current state of this page (it is a leftover from when this page actually contained image format information). And I agree that it makes sense to create another page with information about image formats. However, I would hardly call that a mess. Fixing the disambiguation page would be enough to clarify the issue. A page with information about the img formats would clarify things even more. But from your comments, it sounds as if the contents of this article are really confusing.... yet I don't see in your comment any specific reference to confusing information inside this article itself (besides maybe the article's name). --Sega381 (talk) 15:40, 4 December 2013 (UTC)