Outside The Box
Random thoughts about AutoCAD, ObjectARX, and the meaning of life.
All Original Content Copyright 2006 - 2008 Owen Wengerd, All Rights Reserved
2007-03-01
DWFx: The Emperor's New Clothes?
I pointed out in a previous post that while the press release headlines pronounced that Vista will support DWF natively, the fine print says otherwise. What Vista does support natively is Microsoft's new XPS (XML Paper Specification) format. Autodesk has since clarified that they are working on a new DWF format called DWFx that is, essentially, a DWF in XPS format.
A quick test verified my suspicions that XPS files produced by the Microsoft XPS Document Writer are much larger than comparable DWF files. The jury is still out on DWFx file sizes, but a recent post on Scott Sheppard's blog (http://dwf.blogs.com:80/beyond_the_paper/2007/02/autocad_2008_dw.html) has buried within it a telling comparison point between DWF and DWFx.
The chart uses a neat gambit by comparing both DWF and DWFx file sizes to the completely different DWG format, but the math cognoscenti among you will notice that "typically 1/20 the size of the DWG" for DWF and "typically 1/10 the size of the DWG" for DWFx translates into "DWFx files are twice as large as DWF". There is no information on file generation times, another metric worth monitoring.
Autodesk has been pretty generous lately, first giving away Design Review, now perhaps gearing up for an exclusive two-for-the-price-of-one deal on DWFx. I haven't heard too many customers requesting larger file sizes, though.
A quick test verified my suspicions that XPS files produced by the Microsoft XPS Document Writer are much larger than comparable DWF files. The jury is still out on DWFx file sizes, but a recent post on Scott Sheppard's blog (http://dwf.blogs.com:80/beyond_the_paper/2007/02/autocad_2008_dw.html) has buried within it a telling comparison point between DWF and DWFx.
The chart uses a neat gambit by comparing both DWF and DWFx file sizes to the completely different DWG format, but the math cognoscenti among you will notice that "typically 1/20 the size of the DWG" for DWF and "typically 1/10 the size of the DWG" for DWFx translates into "DWFx files are twice as large as DWF". There is no information on file generation times, another metric worth monitoring.
Autodesk has been pretty generous lately, first giving away Design Review, now perhaps gearing up for an exclusive two-for-the-price-of-one deal on DWFx. I haven't heard too many customers requesting larger file sizes, though.
Labels: DWF, file formats, Microsoft, Vista
2006-12-05
Does Vista really open DWF files?
Not according to the press release. Vista (and .NET 3.0) includes a built-in XPS Viewer (also available for Windows XP SP2 and Windows Server 2003), which will view any XPS format file. Apparently Autodesk plans to add support for output to XPS format in the future, and this output will be called DWFx -- a new file format. It's not clear what the difference will be between DWFx and the output produced using the Microsoft XPS Document Writer that is already available.
I installed the Microsoft XPS Document Writer and XPS Viewer on my Windows XP SP2 machine. Next, I started AutoCAD 2007 and opened "3D House.dwg" from the Sample folder. I then plotted this file to DWF, PDF, and XPS, with the following results:
I'm not suggesting that these files all contain the same content, I'm merely suggesting that DWFx/XPS may have some undesirable tradeoffs in practice.
This whole issue about "native Vista support for DWF" may be nothing but smoke and mirrors. There is no guarantee that publishing CAD data in the XPS format will be efficient. So what will happen if users can choose between a compact DWF, a slightly less compact but ubiquitous PDF, or a very space-hungry DWFx? Time will tell, but I think this issue of DWF in Vista is getting way to much spin and not enough critical analysis.
I installed the Microsoft XPS Document Writer and XPS Viewer on my Windows XP SP2 machine. Next, I started AutoCAD 2007 and opened "3D House.dwg" from the Sample folder. I then plotted this file to DWF, PDF, and XPS, with the following results:
| Plotter | Plot Time | File Size |
|---|---|---|
| DWF6 ePlot.pc3 | 7 seconds | 139 kb |
| DWG To PDF.pc3 | 5 seconds | 165 kb |
| Microsoft XPS Document Writer | 34 seconds | 829 kb |
I'm not suggesting that these files all contain the same content, I'm merely suggesting that DWFx/XPS may have some undesirable tradeoffs in practice.
This whole issue about "native Vista support for DWF" may be nothing but smoke and mirrors. There is no guarantee that publishing CAD data in the XPS format will be efficient. So what will happen if users can choose between a compact DWF, a slightly less compact but ubiquitous PDF, or a very space-hungry DWFx? Time will tell, but I think this issue of DWF in Vista is getting way to much spin and not enough critical analysis.
Labels: Autodesk, DWF, file formats, Microsoft, Vista
About Me
- Name: Owen Wengerd
- Location: Apple Creek, Ohio, United States
I'm a starving artist specializing in the programming genre. I work in my home office, where I am the owner and sole proprietor of ManuSoft as well as the President and chief software artist of CADLock, Inc.
Syndication
Recent Comments
Scott:File sizes vary based on content. As DWF was originally binary to be as small as possible, it is hard to beat. With DWFx being based on industry stndard XML, the files are larger. At this stage of development, files are 30% to 100% larger. Naturally we will work to reduce the difference.
@ March 1, 2007 10:33:00 PM EST
Scott:By the way, the DWFx files produced by the AutoCAD DWFx Driver will not be as large as the XPS files produced by the XPS Writer. A similar condition exists for DWF today. The DWF Writer masquerades as a printer. Hence DWF files published by the DWF Writer go through Microsoft GDI. Using GDI makes the DWF files larger than DWF files produced by the DWF6 ePlot pc3 file used directly by AutoCAD.
@ March 1, 2007 10:39:00 PM EST
CADxp:Thanks Owen for these precisions. Very interesting indeed... I have now a very different opinion on the DWF in Vista and less in a hurry to advise Vista at work...
@ December 10, 2006 5:18:00 AM EST
Scott:Autodesk is not using the XPS Writer to produce DWFx files. We are merely swapping out the existing 2D format for one that is XPS compliant. We are modifying the DWF Toolkit to do this. We are not going through GDI like the Microsoft XPS Writer.
What will be different from a DWFx file from a vanilla XPS file is that DWFx will also have the other data, e.g. 3D and metadata. This means that an Autodesk viewer user will have a more powerful viewing experience. With the switch to DWFx, at least a Microsft XPS Viewer user can see the 2D data. Today a user has no choice but to use Project Freewheel or download a viewer from Autdoesk. In the future, he will have a third choice - the Microsoft XPS Viewer, which as a Vista user, he will already have installed.
@ December 11, 2006 10:34:00 AM EST
Owen Wengerd:Thanks for the clarification, Scott. It will be interesting to see whether DWFx can achieve parity with DWF 6 as far as file sizes and generation times. The proof will be in the pudding, I guess. :)
@ December 11, 2006 3:12:00 PM EST