For those who have to struggle with Adobe Reader to get it working quickly, either update to the latest version (which loads much quicker), or give Foxit Reader a chance.
The client-provided computers we had at my last project (I’m a consultant) were from the Triassic, aye. It wasn’t just a matter of age: they had the minimum RAM and video card that a computer their age would have had, for example. Add that they were set up to not let us use the “desktop” or store data locally and well, it was a pain in the behind, not only because of the computer but of the general psychotic setup. And of course no ability to install or update anything, all programs were at least two versions behind current.
I don’t fear .pdf files, but generally I do hate them. Maybe I’m using the things wrong, but I hate scrolling both down AND sideways because the damn file doesn’t fit the screen, or if it DOES fit the screen, then it’s too small to read (and I’m severely nearsighted). Zooming the file so that I can read it means that I’ll have to scroll sideways for every page.
Give me a .txt file any day, and sure, you can give separate image files. Do not, under any circumstances, give me a .pdf file that does not have any images in it. There’s no excuse for that. Someone had to type in all that text, send me THAT file.
On my old computer, clicking on a PDF link would crash everything. However, if I already had Reader running, it would work fine. So I appreciated the warning - I’d just open Reader and then click the link.
I now have a computer that was built in the 21st century, so it’s no longer a problem.
I don’t understand all the irrational fear of .PDF files, either. Not all of them are child rapists.
People often assume their browser is frozen when it is merely loading a large file and not reporting on the progress until the end.
This has been solved in the later versions (not sure what versions, but more recent than those used by some of our posters, it seams) of Reader and browsers, where the progress is shown in megabytes loaded divided by file size.
Also, in recent software versions (like the 3yo computer I use at work, so it’s not all that recent), it is not necessary to wait for the entire PDF file to load before seeing the first pages. These improvements remove many of the objections to PDFs I see in this thread.
One of the source of irritation to readers is not the PDF file concept itself, but the ignorance of those who create the files and the stubborn software programs that refuse to provide a direct PDF output. I know a newsletter designer who composes the newsletter in MS Publisher, prints the final copy out, then takes it to a scanner which converts it to a PDF (badly). The resulting PDF loses many of the advantages she would have had if she went directly from Publisher to a PDF; the quality is degraded, and the file size tremendous, but she thinks that’s the right way to do it. It’s not.
Acrobat can produce very small, efficient files that preserve all of the formatting, layout, graphics, fonts, pagination and colors of an original document, yet still be text searchable when done right. That’s why I use them whenever those qualities are important.
The Acrobat Reader isn’t the world’s best example of user-usable software, I’ll agree. It looks like much software that was written, then never used by those who wrote it. I think Adobe should spend more time on this, considering it’s the Reader that drives their other businesses.
There’s no reason why a better viewer couldn’t be created, removing your objections. – a “fit to screen” option isn’t all that exotic.
Yes. Use Foxit.
Adobe Reader sucks so hard. I’ve got a beast of a machine and even it takes longer than I have patience for with Adobe. Foxit is lightning fast and PDFs become far less annoying.
Get it. srsly.
Quite honestly, this is incorrect.
Another Foxit Reader fan here.
I have an older version (v7.0) of Acrobat Pro on my computer, but i only use it for creating PDF files from scans etc. When i just want to read a PDF, Foxit is miles faster than Adobe, and just as functional in every other way.
Right, but PDF files do have their uses. They were specifically designed to display a document the same way across multiple platforms and versions, making it easier to deal with fiels where layout and pagination are important.
If i send you a Word document or a text file, and tell you to read pages 22-28, those pages might be in a different place when you open them on your computer, depending on upon how your software is set up. For example, if your page margin in Word are set differently than mine. But PDF eliminates these issues, and page 22 on my computer will look exactly the same as page 22 on your computer. In some contexts, this sort of portability and standardization is very useful.
That said, i do think that plenty of websites use PDF files when a regular old HTML page would do the job just as well.
I’m not talking about the browser not reporting it’s progress - I’m saying that back when I still used Adobe Reader, it would stop the browser from responding to input. You couldn’t use the back button, you couldn’t use the stop button, and trying to close the window would crash the browser completely, closing every window.
I disagree. One of the significant strengths of reading text on a computer is that it can be displayed according to the needs of the reader. Being able to adjust font size, typeface & contrast is significantly more important to a reader’s comprehension than maintaining a pagination which is irrelevant when displaying text onscreen.
The person preparing the document would be far better served by sniping and saving the specific required parts of the document than by sending the whole thing. If the entire document is to be sent, than the person preparing it should use appropriate headings. There’s no practical difference to the reader between searching for a page number and searching for a section header.
File interoperability between platforms hasn’t been real issue for ten years or more. That is, as long as one sticks to common standards like rtf, txt & doc.
And of course, as others have said, it’s always a crapshoot whether a pdf is going to crash like a three winged canary. It’s gotten better over the years but that just means it’s more unpredictable. Little less fear, lot more loathing, imo.
It’s not that the Acrobat plug-in takes all that long to load, it’s just that in comparison with every other browser operation it takes a freaking eternity. The length of time it takes to load one damn file for read-only access is completely ridiculous. Even Word and Excel are less painful. That, in combination with bugs that crop up now and then, has had me convinced that Adobe will never figure out the proper way to write a reader program for their own damn format.
I remember a while back, one issue that had me convinced that Adobe was crashing my browser 100% of the time - it turned out that an “auto update” dialog had popped behind the browser window and interrupted the process until an action was taken on that screen. Actually getting to the dialog box was a challenge (no alt-tab option, no taskbar item) but until I figured it out, PDFs for all intents and purposes froze my browser.
End the pain, save file as, open in FoxIt. It’s almost insulting to me how much better a third party reader is at allowing me to complete my task painlessly and efficiently.
I’m honestly confused here. I can’t think of a single time that a PDF file has crashed my browser or even taken a significant amount of time to load on my laptop. And believe me, that thing is no supercomputer.
Yeah, I know someone who calls what she doesn’t like “hates” and what you don’t like "fears, " even if it’s the same thing. I think it’s a cheap power tactic – implying you are afraid of something suggests weakness, hate suggests strength or dominance.
Not from the viewpoint of the original graphic designer. If I created detailed graphics and placed text in a certain way, I don’t want the end viewer to destroy that.
Take, for example, IRS forms. What would happen if they could be rearranged and modified by the viewer, then returned to the IRS? Think that would work?
You can’t reduce all data to 1. text, and 2. graphics, and treat those groups as something to randomly splash on the screen willy-nilly. If I made a headline a certain font and size, it was for a reason. I want the assurance that my viewer will see exactly what I intended, so PDFs are great for that.
As far as loading the Acrobat app, there is a way to remove 90% of the files that are loaded by default but rarely used. I’d have to search for this info, but when I did that, Acrobat loaded in a flash even on an old machine.
BTW, I just tried Foxit. I selected “custom” install, specified no toolbar, did not want ASK to be my default search site, no quickstart icon.
It installed the toolbar, made ASK the default search site, and created a quickstart icon. Now my effective browser viewing area is smaller since there is now another tool strip taking up space always. Acrobat doesn’t do that.
A quick trial (but not with a stopwatch) suggested that Foxit didn’t load typical files any faster than a slimmed-down Acrobat. So I have removed Foxit. It’s not the perfect solution its fans say it is.
What Musicat said. Some documents, such as forms, need to be kept in a particular format to be completely usable. If I can type the information into the form and print it out for submission, it takes my crummy handwriting out of the equation and keeps the information in the appropriate field, so they’re easier to process. It’s also harder for the reader to mess with the document, which reduces the chances of errors creeping in.
Word documents are far from universally accessible. If I don’t have the right font, for example, the document will not render in the way the author intended; this can make things like tables and columns harder to read, and as others have pointed out, will mess up the pagination. PDFs reduce or eliminate this problem.
Why do people fear .pdf files?
Because Adobe shot a man in Reno, just to watch him die.
I frequently read files on Gamefaqs. The commonly accepted practice is to make headers and code them, and put the index of headers at the start of the file. Frequently the reader doesn’t need or want to read the whole FAQ, just the part of the game that she’s stuck on. Header codes are very easy to use. Ctrl-F and paste in the code, and I can easily find the secret to slaying that boss. The files on that site are almost always in plain text. Every now and then, there’s an ASCII map, and if I copy and save the whole file then the map gets distorted if I am not careful, but otherwise, just plain text does a fine job. I don’t have to scroll down and look for the bestiary, or the weapons list, or whatever.
Sometimes, though, I can’t read that font. Or I don’t have it on my computer, and I really don’t want to search out and download another font. Or the font is too small, and this gets worse as my eyes get older and screen resolutions get higher.
I hate pdfs, and if I have a choice between a text file and a pdf, I will save and use the plain text every single time. If a website is otherwise interesting, but the information I’m most interested in is in pdf form, I’m likely to avoid that website and go elsewhere for my information needs.
It all boils down to whether the file maker is interested in making the information accessible to the user, IMO. Unless I absolutely must have that information, and it’s only available as a pdf, I’m going to go elsewhere.
I use a Mac, so adding Adobe Reader to my applications would be entirely redundant as there is a native app in the OS that handles pdfs just fine. It just doesn’t do it within the browser. So I appreciate the warning that a link goes to a pdf because that means I’m about to have a file downloading that I’m going to have to open manually.
Mind you, I like it this way, so no, I’m not getting Adobe Reader any more than I’m getting Real Player. Single purpose applications serve no use to me.
Why can’t you read that font? Too small? Then enlarge the page in the reader. Not on your computer? Doesn’t matter, as long as the PDF creator specified to “imbed this font”. That’s actually one of the strengths of PDF – you don’t need to have all the fonts the creator did to view them exactly as intended!
As a graphic designer, I am usually interested in making the information accessible to the user in the form which I designed it in. Don’t mess wit mah design!