Adobe Threatens Microsoft With Suit

lseltzer writes "Adobe has threatened an antitrust suit against Microsoft, over PDF writing in Office 2007. Adobe wants Microsoft to separate the feature and charge extra for it. Microsoft has agreed to remove PDF writing, but won't charge extra." From the eWeek article: "In February, Adobe Chief Executive Bruce Chizen told Reuters he considered Microsoft to be the company's biggest concern. 'The competitor I worry about most is Microsoft,' Chizen said at the time. Adobe's PDF technology lets producers create and distribute documents digitally that retain designs, pictures and formatting. "

Comments

Yet another misleading summary.

[TripMaster Monkey]

From TFA (emphasis mine):

Microsoft Corp. said it expected Adobe Systems Inc. to file an antitrust suit in Europe after talks to use Adobe's technology broke down this week, according to the Wall Street Journal.

Adobe hasn't 'threatened' anything. Nowhere in the story is the word 'threat' used.

Playing Devil's Advocate here

[ajs318]

The script "ps2pdf" has been part of the Ghostscript package installed on every Linux, Solaris and BSD system for a long time.

What do Adobe think of that?

Re:Playing Devil's Advocate here

[kilgortrout]

Remember, there are different rules for monopolies. As a monopoly, MS was found to have improperly bundled its browser with windows by US courts, while this same bundling commonly occurs in linux distros. It's improper leveraging of a monopoly position to force a competitor out of business that may be at issue here assuming you can show that MS has a monopoly in the office suite area.

gimme a break

[tehwebguy]

if any of this is really true it should be pretty embarassing for adobe. i would NEVER buy an acrobat product. the free acrobat reader is such a disaster on windows, especially in browsers, that buying an advanced version is like a joke to me.

for reading i use foxit: http://www.foxitsoftware.com/pdf/rd_intro.php

for saving i make an html page and run it through some pdf generator online (i have to do that maybe twice a year for clients who will only take pdf invoices)

not to mention, isn't "Save As PDF..." built into like every other apple application, and can't pdfs be opened with apple's Preview?

This isn't licensing, it's antitrust.

[cduffy]

The argument isn't that Microsoft doesn't have a license -- it's that Microsoft is leveraging a monopoly. The dichotomy isn't whether something is open or licensed; Adobe isn't arguing that PDF isn't open, or that Microsoft needs a license. What it's being speculated that Adobe may argue is that Microsoft, by taking advantage of that open format, is illegally extending their monopoly.

Re:What's sauce for Apple isn't sauce for Microsof

[LnxAddct]

Neither. Microsoft said they *think* Adobe will want to sue them, and so Microsoft is releasing preemptive FUD against Adobe.
Regards,
Steve

Re:When you whine...

[Whiney Mac Fanboy]

When you whine without reading the article, someone will point out to you that Adobe hasn't threatened anything.

You are wrong in this instance. They've opened the format for anyone to implemement since it's good for them gaining market share and ubiquity.

Now that Microsoft wants to add PDF support like thousands other 3-rd party PDF writer products out there (including OpenOffice), they're spreading FUD about adobe, rather then just quietly implementing PDF support.

PDF is an open format for anyone to implement.

They can't.

[cduffy]

This "big stick" is anti-monopoly laws. OOo isn't a monopoly in any way, shape or form.

Well, if you RTFA...

[cduffy]

...it's *antitrust* (read: monopoly-busting) law they're potentially going to be using, not anything regarding copyright or patents -- so yes, it's an open standard; and no, the Ghostscript team isn't vulnerable to the same argument.

There is an easier way than Adobe Distiller

[Weaselmancer]

...it doesn't require 300megs of crappy Adobe junk to be installed which hogs your system, installs a printer driver, and adds its toolbars to every fucking application.

There is an easier way. See PDFCreator. It's a simple printer driver, doesn't take up but a meg or two, installs no toolbars or nag crap. It just makes PDF files.

It's simple, clean, accurate and elegant, IMHO.

Re:What's the Correct One?

[RemovableBait]

Well, I thought this was pretty odd too, until I remebered about one of the Vista 'features' that Microsoft were pushing a while back.

Microsoft are developing a competitor to PDF, codenamed 'Metro', that allows all the same functions as PDF as well as being integrated with the Vista printing system (much like Mac OS X's 'Print as PDF'). They also demonstrated it (I think at WinHEC 2005) printing direct to 'Metro-enabled' printers with a noticeable quality boost. They later renamed the format 'XPS' and it is present in the current Office 2007 builds.

I think this is typical style Microsoft FUD to make it look like Adobe wants them to drop PDF, when actually, it's MS that wants rid of PDF in order to promote its XPS format. Despite PDF's strong foothold, integration of XPS within the widest used operating system and widest used office suite could change things. I reckon this is MS saying "sorry, not our fault you have to use our format!".

Re:What's sauce for Apple isn't sauce for Microsof

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

So I'm guessing that apple took care of the licensing issues far in advance.

Licensing issues? PDF is an approved open standard with perpetual free licensing and patent protection from Adobe. Why would Apple have to take care of anything any more than all the free software projects that re-implemented it?