Exactly. Which is one route to product improvement, if you want to improve it. I think the "UNIX" philosophy will prevent any software created to become a leader and success. Providing things users want, whether developers want it or not, is what it takes to be successful. Otherwise, it's just a hobby. The philosophy may be the biggest impediment to being seriously considered by the majority of computer users, and why the software created under the philosophy will never seriously put a dent in commercial software.
Standards will always be a moving target. There's no way around that. But from what I see, JPG is currently the most popular bitmapped format. Not PNG. Granted, PNG has some advantages, but are the advantages needed by most users? I'd bet not. Just like a Kenworth has advantages over a Ford F-150, not everyone needs a Kenworth. <G>
There's been transparency of one sort or another for a mighty long time. Before PNG, and before GIF's one-bit transparency, even. Heck, if you want to go back far enough we were engraving images into plates of metal, coating them in ink, and pressing them onto the page. And you know what... they included transparency! Any part where the ink didn't appear was implicitly transparent.
But, how much was transparency supported in computer software?
To me, broken is something that doesn't work, not something that's missing.