Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft to Introduce PDF competitor 'Metro'

RustNeverSleeps writes "Computerworld reports that Microsoft will be including a new document format called 'Metro' with Longhorn. Apparently, Metro is intended to be a competitor to Adobe's PDF and Postscript formats. The format will be open and available for royalty-free licensing, and will be based on XML. Can we expect Microsoft to do this right? If they do, I think it could be a good thing." Reader gsfprez is less optimistic: "... I noticed the main, and probably most important difference between old and busted PDF and new-hotness Metro (besides the Queer Eye styled name)... 'We will offer products based on this next generation RIP technology and make them available under license to printer manufacturers and software integrators worldwide.' Yes, I can see it now - entire industries undoing their time-tested, battle hardend PDF-based workflows with free and open files all for the chance to use patented, pay-for-use Microsoft proprietary workflows, software, and files. Good luck with that, guys."

33 of 798 comments (clear)

  1. Too late? by cl191 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I think they are a bit late in the game, given that most people are used to PDF and have PDF reader installed already. It's like Firefox, sure it made IE dropped below 90%, that's still a tiny splash and I don't think it will have the chance to become the majority.

    1. Re:Too late? by Compenguin · · Score: 5, Insightful

      > I think they are a bit late in the game, given that most people are used to PDF and have PDF reader installed already. It's like Firefox, sure it made IE dropped below 90%, that's still a tiny splash and I don't think it will have the chance to become the majority.

      Netscape had massive market share before IE was bundled with windows. Bundling with windows can do excellent things to your market share.

  2. Doing it right... by symbolic · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The format will be open and available for royalty-free licensing, and will be based on XML. Can we expect Microsoft to do this right?

    No. Royalty-free licensing still allows them to place restrictions. And as for XML, so what? Word documents are in XML format, but the XML only encapsulates a bunch of stuff that's still proprietary and inaccesible. Lastly, the last thing anyone needs is another document format owned by a monopoly.

    1. Re:Doing it right... by TractorBarry · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Well said.

      The only reason to use a computer is to manipulate and store data. If your data is being held in someone elses proprietary, secret, format then you risk losing your own data.

      Or as I like to think of it it's like putting your swag in someone elses safe where you haven't got the key. Fine as long as they "play nicely" but what happens when they suddenly decide you can't have your stuff back without paying an enormous fee ? Or that you now have to pay them large maintenance fees for them to keep storing your stuff ? Or in the worst case where they sell the safe to "a big band gang" who now insist this means they own your stuff too ?

      So I think it's a very bad idea. Very bad indeed.

      Insisiting on open formats and open standards also means everyone has to compete on a level playing field. This can only encourage developers/companies to focus more on the quality of the software they produce in order to stand out from the competition.

      So once again all I can say to Microsoft is "thanks, but no thanks".

      --
      Sky subscribers are morons. They pay to be advertised at !
  3. And this is why... by carterhawk001 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Adobe fears MS?

    They spend nearly $4Billion to buy Macromedia, and MS comes out with the half-crap document format??

    Honestly now, someone go slap some sense into Adobe, MS will never be able to make even a dent in Adobe's market share.

    1. Re:And this is why... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Microsoft kill Adobe? You have to be shitting me.

      Sorry, they're big, but not that big.

      Adobe are greater than just PDF, for a start. There are numerous professional publications that have moved from Quark Xpress to Indesign of late, and they now own all of the following as well:

      * Photoshop, the defacto standard for photo editing software.
      * Fireworks (as of the last week), the only serious competition Photoshop has for web developers.
      * Illustrator, arguably the industry-standard vector graphics package.
      * Freehand, one of the major competitors to Illustrator.
      * Dreamweaver, the only thing that has come close to a web development IDE/WYSIWYG editor of any sizable distinction or market share. First person to say "Frontpage" gets laughed at long and loud.

      And they won't kill PDF, either. Every single professional printer accepts PDF. When I submit adverts to magazines for publication, they go in as PDFs. When I get proofs back, they come as PDF.

      People have a lot of money invested in the PDF infrastructure. If they're doing anything serious with publishing, PDF is it. That won't change just because Microsoft give away a free reader with the OS. Many printers and designers use Apple machines or the occasional Sun machine running the hardware, at least over here. Professional printing is a fuck of a lot more complex than just pressing "print" and having the right drivers installed, and the professionals are already over the hurdles of implementing PDF importing and printing on their (extremely expensive) hardware. Why would they switch?

      Microsoft haven't a chance of damaging the professional position PDF has. They should be more worried about whether Adobe will bother to implement import facilities in Indesign for their new format. Which I doubt, as Adobe has money invested in SVG and still doesn't have particularly top-notch SVG import in many of their packages. I suspect they'd have to get in the queue.

    2. Re:And this is why... by EddWo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      People will still use Adobe tools to create content. But when they go to print they will be able to create Metro documents, in the same way that printing on OSX creates PDF documents.
      Even if they decide not to support it directly Adobe cannot prevent people from exporting to Metro without also sabotageing their ability to print from the Windows versions of their applications.
      Everything that anyone prints from any application will be turned into a metro document by the print spooler.

      --
      "Taligent is still pure vapor. Maybe they'll be the last who jumps up on Openstep... "
  4. PDF is A-OK by sockonafish · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There's nothing wrong with PDFs. I can create and open PDFs easily and speedily in OS X with Preview.

    Acrobat Reader, however, is like an eighty year old woman behind the wheel of an otherwise useful and speedy automobile. Why does Preview take a a matter of milliseconds to do what takes Acrobat fifteen seconds or more?

    Oh yeah, there's no dobut that Metro is going to be Trusted Computing Friendly.

    1. Re:PDF is A-OK by Animats · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Why does Preview take a a matter of milliseconds to do what takes Acrobat fifteen seconds or more?

      Just think of all the extra things Acrobat has to do.

      • Load ads from Yahoo into toolbar.
      • Load and verify the "webbuy.dll" DRM system.
      • Load the PDF form management system.
      • Check with Adobe for updates.
      • Check with Adobe for more products to try to sell you. ("There's more to Acrobat than the Reader!")
      • Coming soon: Acrobat/Flash interaction. At last, animated PDFs!
  5. that's not "open" by cahiha · · Score: 5, Insightful

    An XML-based PDF-alternative is a good idea. However, a format is not "open" if it is "available for licensing". "Available for licensing" implies that the creator of the format retains some control, and that is not acceptable, no matter who the company is that created the format.

    Microsoft seems to have trouble with the concept of "open"; perhaps that's not too surprising, since Sun, traditionally one of the strongest proponents of open systems and formats, has developed trouble in their understanding of "open" as well since they came out with Java.

  6. That's Microsoft by nacka · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It doesn't matter if we from the outside can see the complete nuttiness of switching a pdf-based workflow to a MS-the-root-of-all-evil-based workflow. This will succeed, just as Word has succeeded to be the de-facto document standard in every organisation and corporation out there, it's from the same guys who does the rest of the complex shit inside my harddrive. I hear management people saying 'synergetic effects' and we all know what happens when they use that language. Common sense is out the door and stupidity is governor.

  7. Of course by ManoMarks · · Score: 3, Insightful
    As everyone predicted, as in every market that Microsoft has entered, they are doomed to failure right from the start.

    Wait...

    --

    That's gotta fit into your schema somewhere

  8. It is amazing.... by WindBourne · · Score: 4, Insightful

    how many Windows based companies end up being a competitor to MS. Then the same company stays and competes in MS's backyard, with their billions of dollars that they can afford to lose, and thinks that they can win! Such companies as Intuit (who has only one product that is profitable; turbo tax), Adobe (who will come under extreme pressures from MS as MS includes more of their new stuff in Windows for free), Oracle/SAP (who will soon be competing against a reved up MS with all sorts of Business software available for free).

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  9. Re:Royalty free license by taniwha · · Score: 4, Insightful

    am I wrong in thinking that "Royalty Free" doesn't mean you don't have to pay, just that you don't have to pay per copy - what if it's say $100k to play? then FOSS is SOL

  10. Sigh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Seriously Microsoft, with your thousands upon thousands of talented (paid) programmers and with the deadline of Longhorn constantly being pushed back, is it at all possible for you to do something that is not

    a) Reinventing the wheel
    b) Taking someone else's idea and repackaging it
    c) 100 steps behind what open source is already doing.
    d) Inconsequencal to your only major release, Longhorn.

    So what if Longhorn introduces a new document format? Within 5 minutes of running it I bet we'll all find something MS could of spent better their time on.

  11. Yawn by SuperBigGulp · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I don't know if this will catch on or not, and I don't really care.

    What bugs me about this is that MS is the largest software company in the world, with a huge research budget, and one of their best ideas is to come up with an alternative to existing de jure standard. Is this really the best use of R & D resources?

    Come on people, there are real and interesting problems to be solved in software development and usability...use your powers for good.

    --
    Someday a Slashdot ID of 177180 will mean something.
  12. Re:No problems there by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As an end user, I look forward to any replacement to PDFs.

    No, you look forward to a replacement for Adobe's PDF Reader. PDF the format is wonderful -- just look at it's support on Mac OS X.

    The reason government agencies (and many many others) use it is because it's the best, most open, best-supported format of it's kind. There is absolutely no requirement that you use Adobe's software to read or write PDF.

  13. Re:No problems there by the_2nd_coming · · Score: 3, Insightful

    try not using the fucking bloated reader you moron. BTW.. some people like having documents in a none editable, "what you see on one platform is what you see on all platforms" document.

    --



    I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
  14. Re:they haven't done anything else right by mrchaotica · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You know, sucky products I could deal with. It's their business practices I can't stand.

    If they weren't so underhanded and evil we wouldn't have to deal with their sucky products, because market forces would have either killed them or forced them to not suck.

    --

    "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

  15. Re:GET BACK TO WORK ON LONGHORN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Well, mostly it's designed to spreat FUD. The aim is to stop people from investing in Adobe. Why would you do that if Microsoft may come along in some years and do a Netscape on them. They will weaken them with insinuation etc. etc. As long as they are able to get away with transferring their monopoly in one product (the O/S) into illegal monopolies in others with no reaction from competition authorities, this will be an effective strategy against anything except for free software.

  16. Royalty free licensing is still licensing by TheCamper · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It is a good idea to be wary of licenses that are royalty free. Every document that has a license, free or not, allows Microsoft, or any company that owns that license to have a foothold in your life.

    You don't have to pay for MetroReader version 1 or 2, but MetroReader version 3 might not be free, and they also might change the format slightly, and suddenly you're a Word '97 user in a Word 2000 world.

    And then guess what? You have to wait for OpenMetro to reverse engineer the format so you can read Metro documents without MetroReader, because Microsoft decided not to freely license the format to Sun Microsystems.

    PDF is here, it's open, it works well, it's already integrated into many businesses, and regardless of how much you hate Adobe Reader, the format itself is good. There's no reason to switch.

  17. Re:they haven't done anything else right by km790816 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The splash screen to Win2K is a bitmap obviously blown up by 200% or so.

    Slow down, turbo.

    The splash screen is displayed before the video driver is loaded, hense the lack of color depth and resolution.

    If you're gunna flame, check your facts first.

  18. Graphic Studios? by AngryElmo · · Score: 3, Insightful

    So tell me how this is going to work in a Studio-print environment.

    You've got all of these Mac operators, busily using Adobe Indesign and sending print ads out to magazines and newspapers in the required eps or hi-res PDF format (that MUST be generated by original Adobe products for QA purposes). Then along comes Metro and this somehow competes with Adobe.

    How? Adobe make no money from Adobe reader and for the creation of PDF's for the non-publishing industry there have been numerous free (gratis) and/or alternative tools for years. Is Microsoft going to create a killer design tool as well? And for the Mac to boot, coz those graphic artists aint going to swap.

    No. What will happen is this becomes just another Microsoft feature that no other platform/tool will be able to support and we will have yet another reader that we have to load up...

  19. Interesting, but flawed by ta+bu+shi+da+yu · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Firstly, Microsoft was dealing with a universal format - HTML. Sure, they may have buggered it up or extended it, but BOTH Netscape and Microsoft needed to deal with that format. In this case, Microsoft is trying to introduce a new format that noone has adopted yet. I don't think it's going to fly - people have too much invested in Adobe's PDF and PS formats.

    --
    XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
  20. wordperfect vs word , netscape vs ie by Morrowyn · · Score: 3, Insightful

    build it right deep into the os and ms is settled

  21. Microsoft PR Week by Pecisk · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Or is this? I just start to wonder how paid Microsoft PR people are here on Slashdot with the aim to push such articles trough? Because OS X is out? Because Apple is gaining ground?

    I just wonder :)

    --
    user@ubuntubox:~$ stfu This server is going down for shutdown NOW!
  22. Leveraging the desktop monopoly into PDF's turf by SgtChaireBourne · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Assuming anyone still has some computing magazines from 5 or 10 years ago, it is possible to compare the hype and sales brochures for NT and 2000 to what was actually delivered. That would give a baseline on what to expect from "Shorthorn". It may also give a good base for customers who've been burned by pricing, licensing or security issues to file with the Better Business Bureau. I mean everyone who bought into Software Assurance got a good return on investment, right?

    I expect that an alpha version of "Shorthorn" will get pushed out the door in December just to justify claims that it was ready in 2006. The only way for MS to gain marketshare over PDF would be to leverage their desktop monopoly to break into that new market currently occupied by PDF.

    Even if the licensing were just a rubberstamp issue (which it probably isn't) with MS giving the nod till all who request it (which it probably won't), dealing with the paperwork is an unreasonable hurdle and PDF still wins. Publishing is about reaching your audience and that's where a freely available, documented format like PDF comes in. Yes, it's owned by Adobe, but anyone can implement a writer or a reader. Metro fails on that due to licensing restrictions.

    --
    Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
  23. Re:GET BACK TO WORK ON LONGHORN by LarsWestergren · · Score: 4, Insightful

    OT -
    Actually, I would take the "one project boss" if I got to choose. He only fails one project. The other projects can be delegated to someone else by management.

    The million project guy on the other hand obfuscates the resources really needed, which is bad for management because they then start other projects. I bet he also hands out tasks to subordinates and won't listen when they say it is impossible to do with the time allocated, so he makes employees life hell too. So he fails a million projects where some of them might have been saved.

    --

    Being bitter is drinking poison and hoping someone else will die

  24. TrueType vs. Postscript fonts by Spoing · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Remember...no, of course 1/2 of you didn't; you were 5!

    OK...for you kiddies out there; Way back in the 90s, Adobe charged an arm and a leg for Postscript ($1,000/printer) and Postscript fonts were expensive. Apple complained. Microsoft complained. Everyone buying a printer complained or wished for a cheap Postscript printer so !!#@$!$ would look right when they printed. Adobe held firm.

    Apple decided along with Microsoft to change part of the problem...Postscript fonts. Jointly, they developed TrueType. Adobe held firm...till it was obvious that Postscript was in danger. Rates fell on Poscript licences, though it was too late and TrueType fonts became dominate.

    Adobe retrenched and created the Postscript offshoot PDF...and documents became printable and portable again. Adobe became more involved in the detailed document creation process.

    Fast forward to now. Microsoft (by themselves) are attempting to complete the job and take Adobe out of the document creation picture. It's not going to be hard for Microsoft to do it this time. Expect a suite of Metro document editing and processing tools from Microsoft around the time Longhorn is released.

    The only gift in this? You now have a year and a half to two years to plan.

    --
    A firewall can not protect you from yourself. Turn off what you do not need. Do not use the firewall to do your work.
    1. Re:TrueType vs. Postscript fonts by argent · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's not going to be hard for Microsoft to do it this time.

      How do you figure? This time Microsoft isn't competing against an overpriced product and overpriced fonts, and there's no groundswell of anger against PDF.

      If anything, the document format that people are hating right now is Microsoft's own Word format.

  25. Re:Royalty free license by pcmanjon · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The question is will it be available for Linux like Acrobat is?

  26. Re:.met file extension? by CastrTroy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The blah.jpg.bat was a result of Microsoft assuming users didn't need to see file extensions that it knows what to do with, and hide it from the user. By hiding the file extention, the file actually looks like blah.jpg. which looks like an image to just about anyone. Hiding file extensions is my #1 pet peeve about windows.

    --

    Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
  27. PDF more than files stored on the web by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Because the PDF format is so open, the entire print industry uses it. Most of the stuff you read in dead tree form was once a PDF. There are several ISO standards for print-ready PDF files, such as PDF/X1a:2003.

    Many printers ( not the thing on your desk, the companies that print stuff ) have automated workflows built on PDF. You shovel single-page PDFs in one end, and software that understands that open PDF format looks into each file, determines its page number, places that single-page PDF on a digital "sheet" with other single pages ( called an imposition ), and sends it to a machine that makes printing plates. That platemaker understands the open PDF format and is able to image that "sheet" directly to a plate that is mounted on the press. Automated, without costly human hand-holding made possible because many pieces of software from many companies that are not named Adobe can program to an open standard.

    PDF files can also contain JDF data. JDF is XML-based, and it can communicate ( or will communicate ) with many types of printing plant machinery. For example, many printers have robotic paper loading systems, so that imaginary job above that is PDF can tell the paper robot to load the specific paper for that job so that when the plates are loaded on the press, the press can begin printing. The JDF data within that PDF can also tell the paper cutter how to cut the sheets, and/or tell a folder how to fold the sheets.

    All this because of how open the PDF format is. And Metro is going to replace all this, particularly with the momentum PDF already has? I think Metro is just a fancy WMF. Microsoft really needs to copy Apple on this and use PDF instead. Talk about NIH.