Login  |  Register          Free Newsletter Subscription
industry leaders
Subscribe to Graphic Arts Monthly
Ask a Print Expert Sponsored by InfoPrint Solutions Company   


Link This | Email this | Blog This | Comments (7)


What’s the status: Microsoft XPS vs. Adobe PDF?
July 31, 2007

Sponsored by

Question: What is the status with Microsoft’s XPS challenge to Adobe’s PDF?

Answer: It’s still too soon to tell whether or not Microsoft’s implementation of the XPS (XML Paper Specification) page description format is supplanting Adobe’s Portable Document Format (PDF) in any market sector or channel. Vista and Office 2007 have been released and Microsoft “Save as PDF” is now a downloadable add-in. Users of Office 2007 certainly haven’t defected from the PDF camp, where Microsoft reports it is the number two requested feature and where they have received some 120,000 requests per month during the development of Office. In its place is “Save as XPS”—the latest parry in a battle we’ve seen and felt before. Microsoft’s OpenType challenged Adobe technology and eventually morphed into TrueType, and the repercussions are still being felt.

Who’s Gonna Drive?
There seem to be two key motivations for making the change. One is Adobe’s requirement that Microsoft charge for the driver; and the second is the claim that XPS will make output of Microsoft Publisher and Powerpoint files less troublesome. In the end, the XPS driver may be relegated to being the driver of choice for Office applications in office settings. The effect will still be significant on small copy shops and chains, where PDF is the tried and true workflow of choice.

Open Standard vs. Legacy PDF Data
At the heart of this controversy is the open versus closed nature of applications and standards. PDF is not an open standard in the sense that we call Linux an open standard. Adobe still controls its development but is “open” to input on its growth and provides developer’s kits for extending functionality. This has been a problem in the past for Microsoft and Apple integrating PDF into their operating systems. When compared to PostScript, XPS is a more modern language based on XML rather than PostScript. So, while there may be many advantages to XPS over PDF, the disruption caused in dealing with archives of legacy PDF data, established digital workflows based on PDF and third-party tools for manipulating PDF files would be widespread.

XPS: A Nuisance Alternative?
XPS as a technology was first demonstrated by Global Graphics in 2004. Global Graphics is the current developer of the original Harlequin RIPs, one of the original PostScript clone RIP publishers. Global Graphics served as consultant to Microsoft for the development of XPS. If history is any indicator of Microsoft’s commitment to graphic arts and commercial printing, then XPS will live on as a nuisance alternative to PDF at the high end and not grow further to challenge PDF as the ubiquitous eDocument of choice. If the XPS driver is optimized for Office applications and leads to flawless output, corporate environments will become a mix of PDF and XPS content with XPS eventually overwhelming PDF. If the latter is true, printers, both copy shop and desktop, will adapt to accurately output XPS pages.

See It at Graph Expo
Visitors to Graph Expo in Chicago (Sept. 9-12) can see XPS Land, a 1,200-sq.ft. mini-pavilion featuring 10 to 12 booths displaying systems and products designed for XPS. And watch for GAM Workflow Editor Hal Hinderliter’s take on this subject in his August column, due out mid-month.


Posted by Mark Vruno on July 31, 2007 | Comments (7)


July 31, 2007
In response to: What’s the status: Microsoft XPS vs. Adobe PDF?
John Dowdell commented:

“PDF is not an open standard in the sense that we call Linux an open standard. Adobe still controls its development but is “open” to input on its growth and provides developer’s kits for extending functionality.”

Hi Ron, that was true, but in January the governance of PDF 1.7 and beyond was released to ISO:
www.adobe.com/aboutadobe/pressroom/pressreleases/200701/012907OpenPDFAIIM.html

Adobe provides a neutral layer of media services across the range of operating systems and device types. Microsoft seeks to bind every format to its own stack.

jd/adobe




July 31, 2007
In response to: What’s the status: Microsoft XPS vs. Adobe PDF?
Dave Mcallister commented:

Let me add to John's comments. The specification, in ISO language, is now in the process of review and approval within ISO TC 171 SC2. Our commitment, in January, was to release the specification. Adobe has met that commitment,and the standardization of PDF is well underway. In short, the call for votes is out, and Adobe is only one voice of many, many companies, since the ISO balloting is by country, not by company.

it is interesting to note that Linux is not a standard, in the sense of de jure standards. The LSB is a standard, a specification, a Linux distribution is an implementation that may or may not meet the standard. Open source is the ultimate in allowing open communication, in enabling the implementation of standards, but different than an international standard.

davemc/Adobe




July 31, 2007
In response to: What’s the status: Microsoft XPS vs. Adobe PDF?
Ron Roszkiewicz commented:

Dave and John,

Thanks for the background. The press release noted above clearly states Adobe’s intention to move to the next level of “openness” and extensibility with PDF. PDF and Acrobat have been extended programmatically for years to the benefit of every industry. It’s the basis of so many vertical workflows that users believe it is a standard. XPS cannot match this legacy and would be just an interesting technology, just another output driver if it were not associated with Microsoft.

Ron




August 2, 2007
In response to: What’s the status: Microsoft XPS vs. Adobe PDF?
John Ingraham commented:

Thank you Ron for your words and insight on the future of XPS technology.

Readers can also find out more details about the lists of participants and planned events for XPS Land by going to the official website at www.xpsland.com




August 14, 2007
In response to: What’s the status: Microsoft XPS vs. Adobe PDF?
Will Pollard commented:

p>What I find amazing is that there is little mention of MARS, an Adobe project to rewrite PDF in XML.

Adobe marketing seem not to have heard of it, or at least believe the world is about to go so crazy for Flash that it is not worth any energy.

Global Graphics are a relatively restrained company from a marketing point of view but they do put out white papers etc. I do not expect XPS to be limited to a high end pre-press nuisance.

I have written about MARS for OhmyNews
english.ohmynews.com/articleview/article_view.asp?article_class=4&no=372521&rel_no=1

Any new info on MARS welcome.




August 14, 2007
In response to: What’s the status: Microsoft XPS vs. Adobe PDF?
Ron Roszkiewicz commented:

Will,

Thanks for bringing up MARS. Flash does have the sizzle and it is a shipping product unlike MARS which is still in the Lab. In my opinion Adobe is positioning it as a web-centric, enterprise level enabling technology for automating publishing. As such it could eliminate the Import and Export functions in InDesign and provide the same native support that PDF provides today. I would expect future versions of Acrobat Reader to transparently read MARS and PDF without the currently required plug-ins. It’ll be interesting to see what transformations MARS undergoes before it is released from Adobe Labs.

Anyone wishing to explore this new technology can do so at:
labs.adobe.com/wiki/index.php/Mars




August 18, 2007
In response to: What’s the status: Microsoft XPS vs. Adobe PDF?
Michael Jahn commented:

I fail to see how a new file format that does little more than PDF already did 13 years ago would suddenly displace an file format that is entrenched as a defacto standard for exchange with a robust ecosystem with highly reliable tools for creation, preflight, editing, verification and lest we not forget, years of experience with system developers whom have implemented high speed and high quality image processing, rendering and rasterizing these PDF files for proofing and printing.

And before people get all wound up about silly ideas of how - just because it is ‘magically XML - the process somehow becomes simpler to import and export of complex objects like translucent drop shadowed typography with kerning - I say ‘hardly’. Each adobe authoring and creation product has its own “native format” file that is quite ‘different’ than PDF or some XML-ish file. The world of highly formatted automatic publishing may never actually arrive as we dumb down the high minded design for speed and portability. If Microsoft will be successful and changing anything, it will be to make all our documents look like they were built in Word or Powerpoint, with no attention to beauty, as that run opposite to efficiency. Adobe - with Mars - is indeed striving to fully represent all parts of PDF in XML. It will be 2 years before we will see an multifunction devices on sale at Best Buy that have XPS rips in them, and these systems will also be able to image PDF - so, sorry - no XPS change event there either. Where is the value proposition ? What will it really do that would make someone suddenly say “wow, this is BETTER!” - I just don’t see what XPS ‘brings’.





POST A COMMENT
Display Name or Registered Users Login Here.
Please restrict submissions to less than 7,000 characters (including any HTML formatting).

Before submitting this form, please type the characters displayed above:


Advertisement

Advertisements




linkExperts


About Us   |   Advertising Info   |   Site Map   |   Contact Us   |   FREE Subscription   |   Industry Links   |   RSS
© 2008 Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Use of this Web site is subject to its Terms of Use | Privacy Policy
Please visit these other Reed Business sites