Acrobat-killer Submitted to Standards Body 326
Flying Wallenda writes "Did Adobe make a tactical blunder when it complained to the European Union about Microsoft including support for its XML Paper Specification (XPS) in Windows Vista and Office 2007? Now that Microsoft has decided to submit its 'PDF killer' to a standards-setting organization, Adobe may be regretting its decision. 'Microsoft is looking again at its license in order to make it compatible with open source licenses, which means that the "covenant not to sue" will likely be extended to cover any intellectual property dispute stemming from the simple use or incorporation of XPS. The end result is that using XPS may be considerably more attractive for developers now that the EU has apparently expressed concerns over the license.'"
Word Dilution (Score:5, Insightful)
Yet you overcame that and somehow became the new solution until you yourself were killed. And your functionality was conveyed specifically by saying '<competing solution> killer.' They couldn't even take the time to mention what it was you did.
Slashdot uses this way too much [google.com].
Killer [slashdot.org].
Re:Word Dilution (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Word Dilution (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
This is so true. What's funny is that I read an article in the WSJ during my train ride into NYC one morning and kinda chuckled over the fact that the article said how "hacker" has now gained a good connotation and "it has shed its nefarious undertones." The point of the article was that "hacker" used to mean bad bad computer villain and now it's a term for a clever computer person. What made me laugh is
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Gay is another word that has totally changed its meaning. Liberal, Sophisticated (tried a sophisticated wine lately?), for instance, not to mention such subtlties as Freedom Fries, etc.
A language that stagnates, dies. Much as you may want to set it in concrete, it isn't going to happen, because English is a living, changing language. And the dictionary writers fully recognize this - that's why they issue new versions of their produc
Re:Word Dilution (Score:4, Insightful)
Only in America. Out here in the civilised Rest Of The World, it still means "free from prejudice or bigotry; open-minded or tolerant, esp. free of or not bound by traditional or conventional ideas, values, etc."
It took me a while, and many raised eyebrows, before I realised that some Americans use the word as an INSULT.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
The name of the liberal party is "Venstre" meaning "left". Go figure.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
The Killers (Score:4, Insightful)
Embrace, extend and extinguish (Score:2)
"Embrace, extend and extinguish"
as the Deptartment of Justice accused Microsoft of actually stating in internal memos. Like you say, it's alot cheaper for a company like Microsoft to steal someone else's market than to gamble in creating a new one.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace%2C_extend_an
Re: (Score:2)
No, I meant it as a cunning and witty pun to portray to other intellectually competent individuals, my sense of dissatisfaction at the incompetence and political bias existent within the DOJ which resulted in allowing Microsoft to get off pretty much Scot-free...
Re: (Score:2)
Just remember, you keep what you kill.
Adobe is screwed (Score:3, Interesting)
Some examples? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Adobe is screwed? Ha. (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
There's nothing in there for interactivity though, it's strictly a fixed document format.
Re: Adobe is screwed? Ha. (Score:4, Informative)
Ok, by now everyone reading this has surely looked up XPS and can see that it has not only several features that PDF technology doesn't, but it leapfrogs the PDF/Postscript technology in many areas, even including not static publishing concepts that will be a part of the upcoming generation with Electronic Inks.
XPS also is going to hurt Adobe hard in the printer and publishing industry. There are already a number of consumer printers with XPS technology coming to the market and there are also many digital presses that will offer XPS instead of PDF, because it is free to do so instead of paying the Adobe tax.
So for large publishers there is already a bit of a buzz about it, as it may reduce the digital press costs without the Adobe licensing and they are also looking at some of the new features of XPS that will speed up production and produce better quality output easier. (Less need for rasterization and conversion from the original artwork, better font support, etc.)
One of the biggest problems in the digital prining industry now is making sure the content they are producing 'outputs' properly in PDF/Poscript. And this is a BIG issue.
For example I can create Brochure now in AI or CorelDraw that will output with clipping problems when it goes to PDF format because PDF just doesn't handle all the features that full scale vector/layer illustration software offers.
Now when trying to get this to a digital PDF/Postscript based press, this is a MAJOR issue, and the artwork has to be complexity reduced, have the clipping fixed, and often most of the Brochure ends up being rasterized at the press's resolution because the Vector and Font support in a PDF fails miserably.
These types of problems have been big issues in the publising/printing community for a long time, and Postscript v3/PDF was supposed to help, but instead things have often gotten worse. So why even have PDF based press when we (as publishers) end up rasterizing the entire brochure and artwork and are basically sending a PDF Bitmap to the device so it prints as designed?
Here is where XPS steps in and takes control of the ball, it has the preservation because of the extra features in the specification, so there is less fighting with fonts and less rasterization.
There is also the factor that no special software is needed, as Vista does all the XPS work inherently, which opens the door up for more flexibility in design software used as well. (Yes OSX does Postscript/PDF, and even WindowsXP does Postscript printer output, but there is a world of difference in the way Vista handles the from screen to document to output device because of the XAML and XPS technologies.)
XPS is being seen as a welcome fix to many Adobe PDF/Postscript issues in the printing industry.
To fully understand how XPS/XAML technologies work and also to see what they offer than PDF doesn't, you just need to go read the XPS specifications, also do a search on the printer and press manufacturers that are planning on XPS devices and why they see XPS has a good technology.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Apple made a big deal out of "Display PDF" in Mac OS X. However, Display PDF's really just:
Standards (Score:5, Interesting)
If so it would be a major reason to support XPS. If it is just some crap in the Windows drivers forget it. Just checked HP's site and didn't see it mentioned.
The reason it would be great to get it in printers is that it would force it to be a STANDARD, unlike PDF. MP3 is a standard in that any conforming stream will play on any conforming player. New encoders can be developed but the resulting streams must be playable on ANY player adhering to the original MP3 spec. Adobe never figured that out with PDF, requiring a continual upgrade treadmill to newer readers and adding new features in non backwards compatible ways. Even though some printers DO support a version of PDF, it isn't usable for long after purchase.
If it doesn't get embedded into printers I'd trust Microsoft even less to publish a spec and then stick with it.;
Re: (Score:2)
MS shows off their prototype XPS printers and mentions that major printer manufacturers are signed on.
Re: (Score:2)
A bigger problem, in my experience, is that when you give a PDF file to a commercial printer, you run into problems like these:
Citation Please (Score:5, Interesting)
Really?
Name them.
Seriously, I've been looking. I can't find a reference from any printer maker regarding a model with XPS driver support built in.
You'd think someone other then Microsoft would be at least mentioning this, unless it were just MS blowing hot air, which we know Waggener Edstrom [waggeneredstrom.com] (MS's PR agency) would never do...
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Fuji Xerox presents Windows(R) Vista Compatible Prototype at PDC 2005 [64.233.161.104]
Not a thing correct (Score:5, Informative)
Please, in the future, before posting an explanation kindly know what in the hell you're babbling on about.
PostScript [wikipedia.org] and PCL [slashdot.org] are most certainly used for nearly the same purposes: A Page Description Language, aka PDL [wikipedia.org]. Indeed PCL was explicitly created by HP as a simpler, faster and unlicensed alternative to PostScript.
Postscript & PDF are related in that PDF is based on Postscript [adobe.com] (a well written brief history [prepressure.com] of PDF). PDF simply builds upon PS to include meta information, JavaScript, hyperlinking (internally & externally), forms & tag structures, extended colorspaces, etc. And yes, many Postscript level 3 printers can directly print PDF. (That you're unfamiliar with this feature is likely due to your apparent near complete ignorance of high end or prepress printing.)
Oh, and most self-respecting printers don't support PCL, just those from HP or licensing PCL or it's clones (yes, the PostScript workalike has its own clone market!) Further confusing things HP now uses a PostScript clone called Phoenix in their laser printers so they can offer ps support without paying Adobe licensing fees.
Of course, PostScript & PDF are now publicly [adobe.com] documented [adobe.com] and it is possible to recreate them, with Ghostscript [wikipedia.org] being the best known example (Phoenix is probably the most widely distributed)
Lastly, XPS is just a document format as is ODF, PDF,, NO. Nothing about that is right, indeed it pretty much completes every statement in your posting being flat out wrong or wildly inaccurate.
Go away and don't post again until you have something at least marginally correct or interesting to "News for Nerds". You're drooling in public and it is ugly, annoying, and counter-productive.
Re: (Score:2)
If MS really does open the standard, I think it will be good, because it will force Adobe to actually compete in the market. Maybe they will actually make Adobe reader work faster, and stop crippling some of its features in an attempt to make you buy Acrobat Pro.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I love adobe (Score:5, Insightful)
I hope they die real soon.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Some of its features are on the face of it quite good. But forcing reboots, nagging the user to pay for inexplicable "enhancements"... shifting vocabulary across releases, random "features" that offer no value to anyone... it's just painful, painful software.
If Microsoft destroy them and in the process make sure that Vista's impending failure results in us all using ni
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I had to think for a few about this title (Score:5, Funny)
Someone killed a human acrobat and submitted his body?
The murderer was submitted to some kind of law-enforcement?
That is late at night here, however.
Why does Microsoft keep trying to hire The Killers (Score:2, Funny)
About 6 years ago... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Yes. Yes-it-would-be too-much-to-ask.
Hmmm... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I seem to recall that on /., anything Pro-Microsoft is suspiciously Pro-Microsoft.
Wow, for such intelligent people, we sure are objective and skeptical.
Re: (Score:2)
I seem to recall that on /., anything Pro-Microsoft is suspiciously Pro-Microsoft.
It's more like anything that isn't obviously anti-Microsoft, is suspiciously pro-Microsoft.
Details? (Score:5, Insightful)
I always wonder what it really means when Microsoft makes "open standards" and such, ever since the MSO XML debacle. I'll wait to hear some details that confirm that there aren't any dirty tricks involved.
Even so, I'm not sure why I would want to jump on this new standard at the moment. PDF is widely supported, and does a good job for the things it's meant for. Will Microsoft make a program to do the things that Acrobat does? Will it provide different ways to optimize quality/size? Will it work with the companies in the print business to make sure it provides everything they need, and works on their equipment on the same level as PDF? Because as much as PDF is nice for trading print documents online, it's real strength is the support from professional printing industries.
So that's what Microsoft needs to do to be on equal footing with Adobe, which still doesn't tell us why anyone should switch.
Re: (Score:2)
bingo! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
In all fairness... (Score:2)
That being said, I'm not sure it's worth splitting the market with a similar competing format just for these advantages.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:In all fairness... (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Procedural generation of content isn't worth the extra hassle of getting programming language style bugs (stack over/underflows, infinite loops, etc) in your documents.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
The real interesting thing about XML-based file formats is that you can easliy generate files dynamically, especially with technologies like XSLT.
That's not really an advantage over PDF, since you can easily generate PDFs with XML, XSL formatting objects and free tools. Plus there are lots and lots of other tools that already generate PDFs in various ways and from various formats.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
In most cases, I think you'll already have an XML abstraction layer, which you'll convert to XPS with XSLT. But you can also just use XSLT to convert to XSLfo. The only advantage of XPS that I can see is if XPS is more expressive than XSLfo.
Re: (Score:2)
You just wait. I don't think that's going to last long. In fact, this might well mark the start of a feature race of XPS vs. PDF, leaving us with even more bloated formats, and open source renderers lagging miles behind the proprietary competition.
Re: (Score:2)
Also, I don't know how you think one would obtain or return the PDF form in the first place if you don't have internet access. Copy it on a USB drive, fill it out at home, and bring it back? Why not just fill out the form with a pen, jeebus.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I suppose we can conclude from this discussion, then, that all formats suck.
anything is better (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Ranting about acroread, etc. (Score:2)
How about ONE reader that will open and print all PDF files? Just today I had to use xpdf to print a PDF that Adobe's latest version would display and TRY to print, but the printer would just sit and spin. Btw, the printer was an HP with a licensed Adobe Postscript personality. Of course sometimes Acroread will deal with documents xpdf can't. Not as often does it work that way but often enough we have to have both, a
Re: (Score:2)
BTW, Acrobat reader can be made fast. Just disable the 472 plugins you don't need. Three seconds with Google will fix that if you can't figure it out by looking at the file structure.
Can We Please.... (Score:2)
I haven't seen a Ford-Mustang-killer, or a Conair-hairdryer-killer, or an Pepsi-Cola-killer, or an Boeing-Airbus-500-killer before. Why is the information industry the only industry with goddamn KILLER APPLICATIONS or <FOOBAR>-KILLERS? No fucking wonder citizens and customers think software and hardware manufacturer are even less funny than Mickey Mouse and Donald Duck. </rant>
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
A "Killer Application" is so great that people will go out and buy hardware just to use it. Lotus 1-2-3 and WordPerfect caused lots of people to buy IBM PCs back in the day. Pagemaker and Photoshop caused lots of people to buy Macs. E-Mail and the World-Wide Web caused lots of every-day people to go buy Windows PCs. I don't know much about gaming, but I'd imagine that Halo was a "Killer Application" in that it cause
ECMA is warming up their rubber stamp (Score:4, Funny)
PDF is too complicated (Score:5, Insightful)
Either you have resort to using the virtual printer driver supplied with Acrobat, or you have to typeset your document to PostScript format using TeX or whatever.
And if you use the virtual printer driver, forget about interactive features and full-text searching.
Editing PDFs is a nightmare - PostScript allows way too much flexibility for a 'portable' format.
I don't know much about XPS, but organizing the document as a set of zipped XML files seems to be a step in the right direction.
Re: (Score:2)
htmldoc is gpl as well as commercial and included in ubuntu repositorys.
try it pdf isnt just acrobat.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:PDF is too complicated (Score:5, Informative)
And that's bad because...?
You want a programmatic way to generate PDF,
yet you eschew pdfTeX [tug.org], which is a
compiled language that produces PDF as native output,
and is a descendent of TeX, a language invented by
Knuth, a programmatic fellow if there ever was one.
Dick Grayson (Score:5, Funny)
Yes if Microsoft does this right (Score:2)
It does sound better: it is output-only (which is really all we care about in PDF), it uses XML, and it supports alpha compositing like SVG does. Unfortunatly doing anything correctly means Microsoft has to admit that Open Source is not an evil cancer. Don't know if t
How long until its usable (Score:2, Interesting)
I still don't do anything in PDF that can't be done in postscript - in fact I still just produce the postscript and only convert to PDF because not many people have heard of postscript.
FoxIt reader is a good interim solution (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
example: the e-book version of Harrison's principle of internal medicine
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
SVG? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Those are the same comments people have made regarding Windows Presentation Foundation (AKA "Avalon") and XAML [microsoft.com]. Guess what? The pages in an XPS document are XAML files represented in a strict subset of WPF. In fact,
Acrobat-killer Submitted to Standards Body (Score:2, Funny)
What's wrong with Acrobat? (Score:2, Interesting)
Virtually all medical papers are available as PDFs. After downloading these, I can annotate them in Acrobat with comments; Acrobat allows me to highlight important passages. I know geeks do not like DRM, but Acrobat's DRM is why some biomedical e-books are available. Thanks to Acrobat, I carry a little library
DjVu! Shame on OSS (Score:2)
I fear this says something about OSS --why in the long run it will be maginalized by monolopy's like Microsoft.
PLEASE let Acrobat die (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Times are a changin' (Score:4, Informative)
We already have a standard, open, format for this sort of presentation. We don't need another. We REALLY don't need another from a company that is known to "embrace and extinguish" competing implementations of standards.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Times are a changin' (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Times are a changin' (Score:5, Insightful)
This is how Adobe strongarmed MS in removing it from the shipping version of Office, as Adobe was going to demand licensing fees. (However it can be distributed separately without incurring the fees.)
Adobe truly screwed themselves here, they would have been the all time standard with MS giving them full support in Office, but instead they wanted to keep MS at bay and make money off the Office name. Adobe messed up.
From my inside MS sources, the XPS was never meant to become a PDF replacement, even though it has the technology to do so, and even offers more features than the PDF specification. However the move by Adobe to try to screw with MS with the Office Plug-in and taking it even further by raising contention with the whole Vista Composer that is an XAML/XPS technology came as a complete slap to MS.
Prior to Adobe trying to squeeze MS for money and try to stop Vista because of the inherent XPS/XAML composer, MS decided they didn't have to play nice in this market, and I honestly don't blame them.
MS worked with Adobe up until just a few month ago when all of this started coming down. MS even was helping Adobe with using the Vista composer technologies for Adobe products, including their PDF reader. As in MS mind they had no intention of pushing XPS outside of the Vista world which could hurt Adobe, now however with Adobe's actions, they don't feel any obligation to stay out of Adobe's playground and can pursuing opening and dropping XPS technology to all OS platforms.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:If only pdf would really die. (Score:4, Interesting)
Especially the possibilities for inline fonts and ocr'd text using the original font are great.
Re:If only pdf would really die. (Score:4, Insightful)
Acrobat is horrible, but that has no more to do with PDF than Internet Explorer has to do with HTML.
Re:If only pdf would really die. (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
That depends... It certainly is an ISO standard but that doesn't make its use standard in certain areas.
In the scientific community it's a de-facto standard. There are no rules to say you must use PDF (to my knowledge), it's just a convenient and useful standard to use so everyone uses it.
That said, the poster who originally said "de-facto" wa
Re: (Score:2)