It is inherently simple and well documented.
Metaaso on the other hand is the simplest of all solutions. It has almost non-existant documentation and we had to rely on adobe forums with a turn around time of 3-7 days to fix one error. But 4 months and the adobe prototype is not even near completion as it has been throwing errors left and right right from day one. Our pureedge prototype got ready well within 4 months but was throwing some silent errors while using the api. Adobe on the other hand has an impressive suite but they are so complicated. The documentation is there but it is hidden away on the IBM site in a remote corner and it is incomplete as if it is expected that we will pay up $300/hour for its consultants. It comes with a designer but is too complicated to understand even though it is based on XML. But our experience with it has been less than satisfactory. Pureedge is based on the XFDL format and has been an early mover. I'm going to base my conclusions on the following parameters. Later we came across an eforms product from Metaaso and decided to do the prototype on it too. We decided to do prototypes using both Pureedge+Process Server and Adobe Suite. Though a lot of companies already use forms for various applications from leave applciations to information collection. As of now the government, legal and financial companies are the early adopters.
#Pureedge viewer error pdf
Adobe on the other hand has a complete suite of products based on the PDF format catering to the online document market. IBM had acquired Pureedge last year and worked with Silanis eSignature technology. There has been a lot of action in the field. Since the US Army announced that it is going to adopt eforms.