Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft takes on PDF

bhhenry writes "Linux Format reports on a new Microsoft PDF-killer technology to be included in Office 11, called XDocs. From the article: "Adobe's stock took an immediate hit, and some analysts went so far as to compare Adobe to erstwhile MS competitor Netscape.""

29 of 843 comments (clear)

  1. Monopoly Abuse? by otisaardvark · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Surely this sort of thing is exactly what the US DOJ is avidly against - using overwhelming market share (in, say, office products) to gain overwhelming market share in other sectors (wysiwyg "electronic paper"). Hopefully the EU anti-competition measures will be more stringent than those in the US.

    1. Re:Monopoly Abuse? by Mocenigo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yes, but people in the american administration is not happy about the "europan" attitude towards the behaviour of an allegedly "free market". The EU stance is that there is no free market if market is allowed to create a monopoly. In physics this is called a singularity, and Microsoft is indeed a kind of black hole. It engulfs everything, and distorts and ultimately breaks what gets near to it. I am quite happy that we (well, actually, France) also have nukes: GWB will not treat us like Iraqis. After all, we are becoming a "rebel market" in Bush' eyes...

    2. Re:Monopoly Abuse? by rnd() · · Score: 4, Insightful
      This may be the drop that washes the U.S. recession into a depression.


      I hope you're not serious. Can you please explain to us how having two products that do basically the same thing competing for market share is a bad thing?

      Before you start worrying too much about how having a competetor to PDF will kill the economy, think about what will actually happen: 1) Consumers will save money because competition will drive the price of the technology down, and 2) those consumers will have a little extra cash in their pockets that they can use to purchase other goods or buy stock, or just save for a rainy day.

      I'm sorry, but I don't think Adobe is the cornerstone of the US economy. If their market for electronic documents (aka PDF) shrinks, then they may have to cut a few jobs or sit down and figure out how to make their product more competetive. Meanwhile, the rest of us are saving money and getting a better product.

      BTW, have you looked at the price that Adobe charges for Acrobat (not the reader, which is free)? If you want to use PDF you are paying more for it than the copy of Windowz you're running it on.

      --

      Amazing magic tricks

    3. Re:Monopoly Abuse? by Safety+Cap · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Consumers will save money because competition will drive the price of the technology down
      Um... please explain how something that's free can get any cheaper. Reader is free, and the PDF spec API is open - there are some freeware products that create PDF already.

      The danger (as always with things Micro$oft) is that they will embrace, extend, and then exterminate. Witness the web, which is now 99% geared towards IE (which has YET to implement W3C standards).

      --
      Yeah, right.
    4. Re:Monopoly Abuse? by Hal-9001 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Because Microsoft is planning to, and has a good chance of, bludgeoning PDF to death with their overwhelming market share in productivity software, not with the technical merits of their product. If that's not anti-competitive abuse of monopoly power, I don't know what is.

      --
      "It take 9 months to bear a child, no matter how many women you assign to the job."
    5. Re:Monopoly Abuse? by TheConfusedOne · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Let's look at your arguments here.

      1) Consumers will save money:
      Bzzt. PDF Viewer is free. Additionally, the format for PDF is published so that people can write both viewers and creators for free.

      2) Consumers will have extra money:
      Bzzt. Again wrong. You have PDF which is still free versus a feature that will be included in the latest version of Office, which isn't free. Additionally, XDocs competes with the Forms feature in PDF, not with PDF in general.

      So, have you looked at the price MS charges for Office? Oh yeah, in addition you'll need to be running Win 2K SP3 or XP in order to run this version of Office.

      Now on to your straw man. The poster wasn't saying that the fall of PDF was going to destroy the economy. He was stating that the settlement handed to MS will give them carte blanche to wage full scale war against any and all "competitors" in the computer industry.

      THAT could lead to further damage to the economy as we see how MS prices things once they get control of the market segment.

      --
      --- I wish I could hear the soundtrack to my life. That way I'd know when to duck.
    6. Re:Monopoly Abuse? by DickBreath · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Can you please explain to us how having two products that do basically the same thing competing for market share is a bad thing?

      I'll give some examples of how competition can be either good or bad for consumers.

      Good for consumers:
      (depending on your point of view)

      • Several different brands of toasters that all accept the same kind of bread, and plug into the same electrical outlet.
      • Many different kinds of PC hardware with interchangeable parts.
      • Many different software programs that read and write the PDF format. (You can argue about quality of the free ones, but that is entirely beside the point.)

      Bad for consumers:
      (depending on your point of view, whether or not you have a monopoly on a related technology)

      • Several different brands of toasters that only accept Microsoft bread, and only run on Burns brand electricity. (With due respect to Mr. Burns' nuclear plant.)
      • Many different kinds of PC hardware all incompatible (Apple II, TRS-80, Commodore 64, Kaypro, Exidy Sorceror, etc....)
      • Two different standards for electronic paper. One open, with commercial and freely available software. The other closed, proprietary, encrypted, protected by the DMCA, designed by a monopolist, and only readable on a platform that costs an artificially high price, and only writable from productivity software that costs an artificially high price.

      The Microsoft shills can say all they want about how the second set of examples are so good for everyone. Now it is possible that XDoc is just another name for PDF, and Microsoft intends the type of competition illustrated by my first set of examples.

      Guessing which type of competition Microsoft intends is an exercise left for the reader. (Hint: you are allowed to examine Microsoft's past behavior to aid you in forming a conclusion. Be sure to explain your reasoning.)

      (Extra credit: be the first to point out that I've managed to use "competition" and "Microsoft" in the same sentence!)
      --

      I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
    7. Re:Monopoly Abuse? by fwarren · · Score: 4, Insightful
      "Can you please explain to us how having two products that do basically the same thing competing for market share is a bad thing?"

      Sure, glad I could help

      Past performance is the best indicator of how something will perform in the future

      Look at MicroSofts track record.

      • I know we have all benefited from MicroSoft telling PC manufactures that they cannot purchase OEM copies of windows at a discount if "the free market forces" of consumers having a chose to boot multiple OS, preloaded on a machine they purchase.
      • Then with a strangle hold on PC"s that are purchased for home and business, a wordprocessor is a must. So let's bundle in at discount MicroSoft Office for OEM's installs. This surely won't hurt wordperfect. Competition is good.
      • Let's all shout "Hurray" for the free market, MicroSoft will make a java runtime engine, and we know it will be compatible, because they signed an agreement with Sun.
      Need I go on? Need any more examples?

      Yes, competiton is good, But when a Monopoly uses it's power to further maintain it as being a monopoly, that is not considered being "competivie" and good for the consumer.

      While I will admit that as times change, all monopolies lose that strangehold power (who want's to be railbarron?). In the meantime, with price fixing, genuine invovation being destroyed before it is brought to the market, and new "features" being added, not because they are a benefit to the user, but because they further the interest of the monoploy.

      Case in point, when the new version of office comes out, it will only run on Y2k with SP3 or on XP. All news systems will have to be loaded with XP, and the new version office will be the only version available.

      At this point, business will end up with a mix of "new office' and "old office", which will not be compatible. They will be forced to upgrade, because it is good for MicroSoft.

      If MicroSoft was not a monopoly, abusing it's power, there would be real free market competion, and the consumer could, at cost, swith to different word processor that does not lock them in like that. However, lets face it, as all the MS zelots out there constantly remind us, neither WordPerfect or OpenOffice are viable alternatives for most business that are entrenched MS Office users.

      Competition is good (and possible), when you are not competing against a monopoly.

      Bart Bucks are not legal tender

      --
      vi + /etc over regedit any day of the week.
  2. PDF Files arn't easily modifiable. by ruckc · · Score: 4, Insightful

    XDocs are based around the XML specification. Hence, wouldn't they be easily modifiable?

    1. Re:PDF Files arn't easily modifiable. by sql*kitten · · Score: 4, Insightful
      XDocs are based around the XML specification. Hence, wouldn't they be easily modifiable?

      Let me just see if I understand Slashdot's position on all of this:
      • MS Office uses a closed, proprietary format and that's bad.
      • OpenOffice uses XML, and that's good.
      • Now Microsoft want to use XML too... but that's also bad

      So my question to the Slashbots is, will you criticize everything Microsoft does - even if it's something you wanted them to do - just because it's Microsoft? Or is there a serious technical reason that this product is inferior?

      Because, y'know, the best product should always get the support of the market. That's why Excel is so popular.
    2. Re:PDF Files arn't easily modifiable. by khuber · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Just because you use XML doesn't mean that your format is open/accessible. XML is just a low level file format that requires a language to be useful. I mean binary is an open format because all computers understand 1s and 0s right? No...

      PDF isn't a very good format either because Adobe controls the spec. It isn't open.

      Looking at Microsoft's XDocs FAQ since I can't get to the article, it appears to be geared primarily towards creating forms so it's not obvious how it competes directly. I never liked PDF forms and they seems to be used rarely.

      The evilness of XDocs depends on whether you will be able to easily use them without Office. PDF has wide support on many platforms.

      -Kevin

    3. Re:PDF Files arn't easily modifiable. by rant-mode-on · · Score: 5, Insightful
      • Because, y'know, the best product should always get the support of the market. That's why Excel is so popular.

      But why is Excel the best? Is it because they just made a better product and everybody else gave up because they couldn't innovate? Or is it because Microsoft crushed the opposition by exploiting their monopoly?

      I think you'll find that Microsoft ensured that the "best product" never got made, because they knew it wouldn't be theirs.
    4. Re:PDF Files arn't easily modifiable. by Nerant · · Score: 5, Insightful

      One. Slashdot is a forum, not a united voice.

      Two. XML is good, because it's a format that parsers have been written for, so developers don't have to write yet another file format parser, but merely write some additional logic ontop of an existing XML parser.

      Three. Microsoft using XML isn't bad. However, given the history of their actions with regards to standards, and common sense, it is highly probable they'll find some way to subvert XML into some bizarre format that only MS Office can handle. This is what some of us at Slashdot feel will happen. XML isn't bad, but Microsoft doesn't have a track record for following standards. They do however, have the high score for subverting them.

      --
      Be kind. There are too many mean people out there already.
    5. Re:PDF Files arn't easily modifiable. by pubjames · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Let me just see if I understand Slashdot's position on all of this:
      [..]
      Now Microsoft want to use XML too... but that's also bad


      It's simple. The people who post to Slashdot generally don't trust Microsoft. And they've good reason not to. Even when they say they are using a particular format, they deliberately do stuff to make it incompatible with anything that isn't from Microsoft.

      Try this simple test. Open a document in Microsoft Word 2000. Save as HTML. Look at the HTML. You will find yourself looking at something that is unlike any other HTML you'll ever come across.

      So when Microsoft say that XDocs is in XML format, it doesn't really mean it will be in XML format, just something they themselves call XML format.

      Microsoft hasn't done anything recently that has convinced me that I can trust what they say. So I don't. The mistrust runs so deep that I, and I expect may other people who post on Slashdot, will be absolutely amazed if we open an XDoc and see something like this:
      <title style="heading1">This is a title</title>
      rather than (and this is a small extract from a very simple document in Word 2000 saved as "html"):
      <!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
      <w:data>08D0C9EA79F9BACE118C8200AA004BA90B02000000 080000000D0000005F0054006F006300320034003200350038 003400330031000000</w:data>
      </xml><![endif]--></s pan><!--[if supportFields]><span style='color:windowtext;
      display:none;mso-hide:sc reen;text-decoration:none;text-underline:none'><sp an
      style='mso-element:field-end'></span></span><! [endif]--></a></span><o:p></o:p></p&g t ;

  3. Ok, so microsoft trides to do this now by mrpuffypants · · Score: 5, Insightful

    But I see that this, unlike browsers a few years back, as being pretty damn entrenched in the business and graphics world.

    With browsers 6 years ago there was very little loyalty, so MSIE could move in before everyone realized just how powerful MS was going to be over Netscape and the other companies involved in browsers.

    But with Adobe Acrobat we're talking about a refined and popular format. Actually, Acrobat is one of the best file ideas out there, IMHO. It is perfectly cross platform, well designed, and (neglecting to note the whole russian programmer fiasco) Adobe has a good business model behind it.

    MS's only strong point could be integration, like they offer with all of their other 'solutions', but Adobe already has great integration wih their own suite of programs and even with Microsoft Word.

    They should call it Bob...

  4. Re:Stock took a hit? by commodoresloat · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No doubt. How is MS still this powerful, that the mere breath of possible vaporware is enough to send investors scurrying away from the competition? People have seen through their shenanigans for years, have even demonstrated some of them (though perhaps the least noxious of them) in open court, and yet when they say jump the only thing we can say is how high? It's pathetic.

  5. Re:Just a side note by e8johan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Sure IE will come with support for it, and of course that support is not optional, you'll end up downloading and installing it no matter what (as long as you insist on using Windows).

    As Office evolves it will be more and more integrated into IE and even though IE is not required by the OS, it will be required by Office. I believe that the recent ruling only concerned their dominance in the OS area, not in productive software (i.e. Office), but I may be wrong about that.

  6. Re:Stock took a hit? by NightRain · · Score: 5, Insightful
    No doubt. How is MS still this powerful, that the mere breath of possible vaporware is enough to send investors scurrying away from the competition?

    That says as much about the sad state of the way the stock market works as it does about MS. If people believe that other people believe this will affect Adobe, then they will bail out before those 'other people' do. This of course causes other people to bail out, and the next thing you know, the bottom has dropped out of the stock.

    Ray

  7. Re:Will XDocs support 'ALL' the features in PDF? by fishnuts · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It will be a PDF Killer when they include it in every single MS product. IIS will have modules to generate and process them on-the-fly, IE7 will have the Viewer, Office will have the Publisher, Exchange will have its own interface, of course, and since they'll certainly be wrapping it in a layer of DRM, the DMCA will prevent anyone from reverse-engineering it to produce a compatible Viewer for NS/Moz/Konq/Opera/Lynx or *insert-your-non-MS-OS-here*.

    And since this idea wasn't mentioned at all during the DOJ Antitrust trials, DOJ probably wont bother touching it.

  8. Re:Stock took a hit? by ProfessorPuke · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Don't call it sad! Look at it as your own chance to pick up bargain shares!

  9. Re:So bloody typical MS by NeuroManson · · Score: 4, Insightful

    There's a common misperception in regards to what "innovation" means. Most companies that are not making a new and unique product depend largely on taking preexisting concepts and designs and either finding improvements or enhancements to said design, often creating their own proprietary applications.

    For example, one could easily accuse Adobe of the exact same theft of concept:

    (1)They patented Postscript type as a way to allow desktop publishing to advance to a point where it could compete with conventional printing shops, while similarly giving themselves a near monopoly on the desktop with applications such as Pagemaker. Speaking of which...

    Pagemaker was a desktop publishing app that basically put Adobe on the map, despite it's being released at a time when there were multiple companies making various flavors of SOHO publishing solutions. Other than the GUI and certain key tools, it wasn't really that innovative, and Adobe can easily be accused of "ripping off" other software companies.

    Also, the same applies to Photoshop. One could easily claim as well that it was almost a direct rip of MacPaint when it first came out. Once again, other than the GUI and key tools, it wasn't that innovative, there were hundreds of paint/edit programs on the market. Similarly, the same applies to Freehand (surprisingly, the sole piece of software that's not innovative at all, and still recieving ample competition from Corel).

    Ahhh, and then we move to the PDF format, which ironically was an application meant to provide an alternative to rich text Word documents. Not exactly any innovation there either, in fact, far more bloated and complicated than even Word could ever hope to be.

    So Microsoft made their own "PDF Killer"... It isn't like they haven't ripped off other companies before, the implied fear of Adobe somehow losing to Microsoft in a market where they have a considerable share is ridiculous.

    Personally, I dislike PDF, especially in terms of bloat and loading delays in browsers. It's ridiculous, to have to wait an extra 5-10 seconds for Acrobat to load (and another 10-15 seconds just to load the document into the browser, just to read a tech sheet. It's gotten increasingly slower as they add idiotic things like update scans that bog the system down with redundant inquiries, and the software steers further away from what it was originally meant to do: Read PDF documents.

    Now as for real innovation, don't hold your breath hoping for it. The market currently depends on a very limited range of hardware, and as long as they're locked into established standards, they won't truly become innovative. Add to that the hobbling of VC funded "innovations", which never take off due to the incapacity of CEOs to look at the big picture (as evidenced from IBM's first taste of the microprocessor, without the slightest idea of what to do with it).

    At least until they learn to, and this should be the mantra: Invent.

    --
    Just because you can mod me down, doesn't mean you're right. Shoes for industry!
  10. PDF is to XML, as Acrobat is to XDocs by starvingartist12 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    ...reports on a new Microsoft PDF-killer technology to be included in Office 11, called XDoc
    The PDF-killer isn't XDocs. It isn't even new technology.

    XDocs is only Microsoft's front-end application for modifying XML (which the original slashdot post never mentioned). XDoc is positioned as a Word-like way of manipulating XML form data (Screenshot).

    If anything, XML will be the PDF-killer. Adobe trapped themselves into a corner when they devoted themselves to a proprietary file format instead of using XML. With everyone jumping on the XML bandwagon, no wonder Adobe's stockholders are getting nervous.
    1. Re:PDF is to XML, as Acrobat is to XDocs by Baki · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Why the hell would Acrobat be more proprietary than some as of yet unknwon XML DTD (or schema)?

      The only fundamental difference is:
      binary format (Acrobat) versus ASCII/Unicode (XML) i.e. 'human readable'.

      First, proprietary not human readable. Proprietary means an undisclosed file format.

      XML without a published DTD or Schema (published both the scheme and how to interpret it) is just as proprietary as any other undisclosed file format. At best, it might be easier to reverse engineer (which is forbidden in the US).

      AFAIK, Acrobat is an open format (yes, even binary formats can be open, gasp). Whether XDoc(s) shall be open remains to be seen.

      This irritating misuse of proprietary and concept of 'not binary == good' misleads to many mistakes and creates false understanding.

  11. Re:Stock took a hit? by Scarblac · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That says as much about the sad state of the way the stock market works as it does about MS.

    After the result of the lawsuit came out, MS stock went up, of course. And then, so did the stock of a lot of other tech companies. After all, as my newspaper explains, when the biggest company of them all goes up so much, that means the whole sector must be on a rise!

    So, in short, stock market logic:
    1. Microsoft abuses their competitors, abusing a monopolistic stranglehold on many other businesses
    2. But they avoid bad punishment in the resulting lawsuit, and can basically continue their practices
    3. That's good for Microsoft!
    4. That must be good for the competition!!
    ("5. Profit!" occurs only in their dreams).

    --
    I believe posters are recognized by their sig. So I made one.
  12. XDocs is just a modern clone of Lotus Notes by thing12 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    It's a just an editor and toolkit to put forms on your company intranet (and probably later the Internet) to gather data. That's all it is - not a PDF killer - not even a PDF competitor. From Microsoft's XDocs web site:

    "XDocs," a code name for the newest member of the Microsoft Office family, streamlines the process of gathering information by enabling teams and organizations to easily create and work with rich, dynamic forms. The information collected can be integrated with a broad range of business processes because XDocs supports any customer-defined XML schema and integrates with XML Web services. As a result, XDocs helps to connect information workers directly to organizational information and gives them the ability to act on it, which leads to greater business impact.

    Does that sound like a pdf killer to you? Does it even sound like they're after the same market? Sure they're using XML and they're making "documents" - still sounds more like Lotus Notes than Acrobat. But who uses Acrobat/PDF to collect data? Yes, there are forms in PDF, but the implementation is not nearly flexible enough to build a data collection application, nor can you build decent data collection apps around MS Word.

    XDocs is designed to work with any customer-defined XML schema. Where's the proprietary nature there? You give it your proprietary schema and then you use it to build forms to collect data into that schema. All Microsoft is doing is implementing a framework to easilly collect and present information. This is exactly what Lotus Notes was doing more than 5 years ago, only with XDocs the collected data is stored using your XML DTD instead of Lotus's proprietary NSF format. I'm sure Microsoft will extend it to the web - just using an XSL transform to change the XDoc into HTML and collect your data that way.

    None of this prevents you from using a PDF to archive resulting documents. To be sure, you can probably embed an XDoc form into an XML dataset and view the resulting file with an XDoc viewer - but that's still one more app that everyone needs, and PDF is still the best portable format for archiving all sorts of documents and images. XDoc just collects information. Yes... all very insidious of Microsoft. A PDF killer.. I don't think so. I don't even see it as a PDF competitor.

  13. Re:Stock took a hit? by techstar25 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Obviously those stockholders have never heard of Photoshop or Illustrator, software so dominating that MS had to quietly pull their own competing Photodraw off the shelf, just to save face. I'll be glad to pick up those bargain shares.

  14. Re:Stock took a hit? by jez9999 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    But that was what the stock market was always for... getting rich. People never bought shares in a company because they liked the company. Maybe because they thought it would perform well, yes, but the only only people who own shares in a company because they like it are possibly the company's owners/workers.

  15. Re:Stock took a hit? by joto · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Well, on the other hand, most so-called tech companies aren't competitors to Microsoft. They make software that relies on Microsoft products to work. (i.e. windows, office, vb, ie, etc...) So what's bad for Microsoft is bad for them as well. Not everyone can be making OSes and Office-suites...

    That being said, the stock market is designed to be unstable and fluctuate. Why it doesn't fluctuate even more is beyond my understanding, but there must be some factors that stabilize it as well (they are called long-term investors, I guess).

  16. Re:Stock took a hit? by jasonditz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I would guess the hit ADBE took today is more related to the downgrade from Deutsche Securities than anything MSFT did.