Microsoft to create a new challenger to Adobe's PostScript ...


Arpan

macrumors newbie
Oct 13, 2004
15
0
Adobe

Perhaps this is why Adobe was nervous enough to spend billions on Macromedia.
 

TwitchOSX

macrumors 6502
May 2, 2002
496
2
Southern Oregon
NOOOO.. DAMNIT!

I didnt read the article but I can only imagine (as a pre-press technician) how many headaches this will cause. Son of a bitch. Let me lay out what will happen.

1. MS will bring out a way to have something similar to PDF, but will fail in comparison in EVERY SINGLE WAY

2. It will get shipped with new PC's and will be the default way for sharing documents on PC's.

3. Idiot users or non tech savvy users will use this format because they dont know anybetter and MS will probably tout it as a "professional" way to share documents on the web and yadda yadda yadda.

4. People will start trying to give these things to me to have them printed.

5. I will tell them "sorry, you have to PDF it - go to primopdf.com and use that just like everybody else"

I really really hate MS. They are just going to **** up the graphics industry even more.
 

montex

macrumors regular
Jan 17, 2002
245
0
Seattle, WA
Now here's something that fills my heart with joy. Microsoft trying to best Adobe's PDF. How long did it take Adobe to get the PDF up to a standard that is cross platform and dependable? 10 years? Now comes M$ to muck up the workflow with yet another new format that I'll just bet won't be nearly as reliable as the PDF. Some days it just sucks working in Prepress.

From the company that brought you Publisher...
 

Arpan

macrumors newbie
Oct 13, 2004
15
0
TwitchOSX said:
I didnt read the article but I can only imagine (as a pre-press technician) how many headaches this will cause. Son of a bitch. Let me lay out what will happen.

1. MS will bring out a way to have something similar to PDF, but will fail in comparison in EVERY SINGLE WAY

2. It will get shipped with new PC's and will be the default way for sharing documents on PC's.

3. Idiot users or non tech savvy users will use this format because they dont know anybetter and MS will probably tout it as a "professional" way to share documents on the web and yadda yadda yadda.

4. People will start trying to give these things to me to have them printed.

5. I will tell them "sorry, you have to PDF it - go to primopdf.com and use that just like everybody else"

I really really hate MS. They are just going to **** up the graphics industry even more.
I doubt that it will ever gain traction in the graphics industry. I would guess that Microsoft's main target is the corporate user who uses PDFs for various reasons such as identical view across computers, security, forms etc.
 

Peyote

macrumors 6502a
Apr 11, 2002
760
0
If it ain't broke, don't try to come out with a new format that is gonna cause everyone in the print industry headaches because windows users are typically ignorant when it comes to file formats.

Quicktime is to Realplayer

as

PDF is to Metro.


From the print industry to Microsoft: WE DON'T NEED ANOTHER CRAPPY MS FORMAT TO DEAL WITH.
 

JDOG_

macrumors 6502a
Nov 19, 2003
786
0
Oakland
Oh please, re-invent the wheel, because PDFs are really so hard to use.

And "Metro", a name that instantly conjures up "metrosexual" in my and the rest of my generation's minds.

I love how winFS was going to be one of the biggest features of Longhorn, but they couldn't even get that right enough to put in the shipping build, what makes people think they're going to get "metro" right?

/m$ flamage.

EDIT: NFTS changed to winFS, thanks. Still sucks for m$ though, I bet they were excited about getting that in there. I wonder how many people will upgrade to winFS when they go public with it.
 

TwitchOSX

macrumors 6502
May 2, 2002
496
2
Southern Oregon
Arpan...

Well sure... BUT.. do you work pre-press? Do you know how many times (mostly with small - medium size print shops such as ours) we get asked to open Publisher documents? Hell, I have had tons of people ask me to open "PrintShop" stuff.. which I guess is some lamo software that comes with scanners or something. This "metro" crap will just mess with my head some more.
 

swmooretiger

macrumors newbie
Aug 27, 2003
26
0
ugh

And this is why MS just doesn't get it. PDF is already a great cross-platform document format...why not, oh, I dunno, buy into that format?? Because M$ just wants their fingers in EVERYTHING. Sometimes a company just has to pull back and figure out what the hell their core business is and stick to it, instead of coming up with dumb half-way crappy solutions to EVERY problem out there. Oh well, I definitely won't touch this with a 10ft pole, and will steer any and all windows friends away from this format...just a bad bad bad bad idea...then again, shouldn't we have expected as much?
 

Peyote

macrumors 6502a
Apr 11, 2002
760
0
Arpan said:
I doubt that it will ever gain traction in the graphics industry. I would guess that Microsoft's main target is the corporate user who uses PDFs for various reasons such as identical view across computers, security, forms etc.

Of course graphics professionals are unlikely to use it, but that doesn't mean we won't have to deal with it.

Windows users *typically* refuse to learn what formats they should be using, and will use whatever is handy, instead of whatever is right.
 

Some_Big_Spoon

macrumors 6502a
Jun 17, 2003
855
0
New York, NY
Anyone actually surprised by this? Microsoft's baby isn't windows, it's the proprietary lock in. Open standards are it's one and only threat at this point, being that governments, companies and joe six pack seem to love the baffling ordeal that is their software "solutions".

They'll create this "alternative", ship it standard on lonhorn or some service pack, and do what they do with all competing tech, which is box it out, and make it incompatible with their software.

Why didn't Apple by Macromedia again? (or TiVo for that matter.. *sigh*)
 

Some_Big_Spoon

macrumors 6502a
Jun 17, 2003
855
0
New York, NY
On the contrary, they absolutely "get it".. see my previous post.

swmooretiger said:
And this is why MS just doesn't get it. PDF is already a great cross-platform document format...why not, oh, I dunno, buy into that format?? Because M$ just wants their fingers in EVERYTHING. Sometimes a company just has to pull back and figure out what the hell their core business is and stick to it, instead of coming up with dumb half-way crappy solutions to EVERY problem out there. Oh well, I definitely won't touch this with a 10ft pole, and will steer any and all windows friends away from this format...just a bad bad bad bad idea...then again, shouldn't we have expected as much?
 

Peyote

macrumors 6502a
Apr 11, 2002
760
0
Some_Big_Spoon said:
Anyone actually surprised by this? Microsoft's baby isn't windows, it's the proprietary lock in. Open standards are it's one and only threat at this point, being that governments, companies and joe six pack seem to love the baffling ordeal that is their software "solutions".

They'll create this "alternative", ship it standard on lonhorn or some service pack, and do what they do with all competing tech, which is box it out, and make it incompatible with their software.

Why didn't Apple by Macromedia again? (or TiVo for that matter.. *sigh*)

Actually they are claiming that this new "Metro" document format is an open format, but it doesn't matter. Whether or not it is compatable with everyhting else out there, MS will half ass the format and push it down windows users' throats...regardless there isn't a thing wrong with PDFs.
 

daveL

macrumors 68020
Jun 18, 2003
2,425
0
Montana
JDOG_ said:
Oh please, re-invent the wheel, because PDFs are really so hard to use.

And "Metro", a name that instantly conjures up "metrosexual" in my and the rest of my generation's minds.

I love how NFTS was going to be one of the biggest features of Longhorn, but they couldn't even get that right enough to put in the shipping build, what makes people think they're going to get "metro" right?

/m$ flamage.
Uhmm ... it's WinFS, not NTFS (I think that's what you meant).

Anyway, I agree with all the posts. Here goes M$ screwing up another technology, because their ego is so huge they can't stand the idea of using someone else's superior technology. The only "right" thing for M$ to do is license PDF tech from Adobe, as Apple did long ago. Ya, right.
 

dashiel

macrumors 6502a
Nov 12, 2003
876
0
hey metro actually sounds pretty cool. looks like you'll be able to print either to a printer, or directly to a PDF-like file! i wish apple would do something like that with OS X... oh wait, that's right it's been in OS X since day 1 :rolleyes:
 

nsb3000

macrumors 6502
Jun 17, 2003
275
0
Boston, MA
daveL said:
Uhmm ... it's WinFS, not NTFS (I think that's what you meant).

Anyway, I agree with all the posts. Here goes M$ screwing up another technology, because their ego is so huge they can't stand the idea of using someone else's superior technology. The only "right" thing for M$ to do is license PDF tech from Adobe, as Apple did long ago. Ya, right.
I don't think Apple ever licensed PDF from Adobe for OS X. They sort of reversed-engineered it, as I recall.
 

iJed

macrumors 6502
Sep 4, 2001
264
0
West Sussex, UK
This is typical Microsoft. Add another pointless file format when there OS currently lacks support for many common file formats like PDF, Flash, bzip, gzip, tar, jpeg2000, etc, etc. Maybe they should spend time fixing this rather than adding yet another feature that nobody needs or wants.
 

tutubibi

macrumors 6502a
Sep 18, 2003
538
0
localhost
File size

Knowing Microsoft and their tendency to create bloatware it will be something like this:

Sample Text File: 1 KB
Same thing in PDF: 3 KB
Same thing in MS Word DOC: 20 K
Same thing in Metro: 50 KB

Cicso and other network manufacturers must be very happy. Imagine the impact "Metro" will have on the bandwidth.
 

stoid

macrumors 601
The webteam I work on uses Windows, and we often have to convert Microsoft Word documents to PDF format. Unfortunatle in our small office of 5 machines there is only one machine that has the needed software installed on it to convert to PDF. It's a pain to have to switch to that machine (especially if someone else is using it) just to do a pdf conversion. I've been tempted to bring in my PowerBook since OS X seemlessly spools to pdf format and use that for conversions.

I see this as Microsoft's way of allowing this capacity, and if it works, I'll accept it with open arms. The problem is that based on Microsoft's history of sub-standard products, it's likely to be "just good enough" of course meaning, "substantial for every situation except for the ones that matter".
 

x86isslow

macrumors 6502a
Aug 10, 2003
889
10
USA
if adobe acrobat reader is still the hellish POS i used to use when i had windows, i can see why MS would want to create this new standard, and why Windows users will flock to it.

I'd venture to say its not too different from Apple creating FCP in response to Adobe's crappy whatever-it-was.
 

dotdotdot

macrumors 68020
Jan 23, 2005
2,381
31
Don't be upset at Microsoft for this... you are all Apple users (well, most) - What did Apple do for OS X?? Yep, they created their own PDF format. Adobe PDF, well, sucks. It costs money just to create a PDF and all free stuff sucks...
 

Peyote

macrumors 6502a
Apr 11, 2002
760
0
x86isslow said:
if adobe acrobat reader is still the hellish POS i used to use when i had windows, i can see why MS would want to create this new standard, and why Windows users will flock to it.

I'd venture to say its not too different from Apple creating FCP in response to Adobe's crappy whatever-it-was.

If Microsoft wants to create a better version of Acrobat to open PDFs, I'm all for it, but they want to replace the PDF, which is going to cause a lot of problems. You don't seem to have a problem with PDFs, you dislike acrobat. So you see, it's not just about the programs to open documents, it's about the document format itself.
 

crackpip

macrumors regular
Jul 23, 2002
210
0
nsb3000 said:
I don't think Apple ever licensed PDF from Adobe for OS X. They sort of reversed-engineered it, as I recall.
If I recall correctly, Adobe has an open version of PDF that doesn't require a license fee, but only has a subset of the full pdf spec. Apple chose to use this instead of paying the fee for a full version, which is why some of the widgets and things that you can add in Acrobat are not visible in Preview.app. I think I remember Apple switching somewhere around Mac OS X developer preview 3 or 4. But then again, I could just be pulling this out of my ass.

crackpip
 

Peyote

macrumors 6502a
Apr 11, 2002
760
0
x86isslow said:
if adobe acrobat reader is still the hellish POS i used to use when i had windows, i can see why MS would want to create this new standard, and why Windows users will flock to it.

I'd venture to say its not too different from Apple creating FCP in response to Adobe's crappy whatever-it-was.

If Microsoft wants to create a better version of Acrobat to open PDFs, I'm all for it, but they want to replace the PDF, which is going to cause a lot of problems. You don't seem to have a problem with PDFs, you dislike acrobat. So you see, it's not just about the programs to open documents, it's about the document format itself.
 

emw

macrumors G4
Aug 2, 2004
11,177
0
There may be one thing that makes feel a little more comfortable with this development:

Global Graphics' technical services consulting group has been working with Microsoft's Windows development team on the Metro spec for two years, the Microsoft partner said.
Global Graphics is the company that includes the former Harlequin group, who have built quality RIPs in the past that do not rely upon Adobe code, and also have their own non-Adobe PDF technology in JAWS.

Not to say MS won't screw it up, but at least they've partnered with someone who knows something about what they're doing.