NationStates Jolt Archive

Seriously, it's the most slowest, unstable fucking program ever. And it's not like it's doing extremely important tasks. It's a massive resource hog, always crashes and is just really slow and not user-friendly. And I don't buy that it's only slow because the resolutions of the papers they show are 'really high', google books is fast as shit and that shows papers in pretty high resolution.

So does anyone else find acrobat reader to be shit? Any ways to make it faster etc...?

Tis.

Yes it is a piece shit, and no, I don't know of any way to make it faster. I don't use it; I use FOXIT (http://www.foxitsoftware.com/pdf/reader/download.php).

Yes. Its shit. Occasionally, if it won't load a document saving it to disk and then opening will mean that file magically works. But I use foxit reader now, since I can't be bothered faffing around for hours to be able to view a document.

If you think reading an acrobat is tough, you should try writing on one. :tongue:

Flash player is pretty goddamned awful too.

Many printer drivers that destroy your computer's ability to function.

Yes it is. I don't use it; I use FOXIT (http://www.foxitsoftware.com/pdf/reader/download.php).

Hmm, interesting. I'll check it out, cheers!

Seriously, it's the most slowest, unstable fucking program ever. And it's not like it's doing extremely important tasks. It's a massive resource hog, always crashes and is just really slow and not user-friendly. And I don't buy that it's only slow because the resolutions of the papers they show are 'really high', google books is fast as shit and that shows papers in pretty high resolution.

So does anyone else find acrobat reader to be shit? Any ways to make it faster etc...?
No problems at all. Docs load fast enough and print fast enough. Plus it makes so many things available that wouldn't be, otherwise. What other portable standard do we have? RTF?

No problems at all. Docs load fast enough and print fast enough. Plus it makes so many things available that wouldn't be, otherwise. What other portable standard do we have? RTF?

We can use the current standard easily with another program. I find that Foxit is good with opening documents swiftly and efficiently. I don't have the latency issues I did with Adobe.

We can use the current standard easily with another program. I find that Foxit is good with opening documents swiftly and efficiently. I don't have the latency issues I did with Adobe.
Never heard of it, until now... While I was typing, that post rolled in.

What sorts of latencies do you see? I usually associate that word with real-time computing, not document viewing.

Seriously, it's the most slowest, unstable fucking program ever. And it's not like it's doing extremely important tasks. It's a massive resource hog, always crashes and is just really slow and not user-friendly. And I don't buy that it's only slow because the resolutions of the papers they show are 'really high', google books is fast as shit and that shows papers in pretty high resolution.

So does anyone else find acrobat reader to be shit? Any ways to make it faster etc...?

What part is not user-friendly?

PS: Do you have the Tourette syndrome?

Never had any problems with adobe reader, maybe your comp is slow? Try google docs.

What part is not user-friendly?

PS: Do you have the Tourette syndrome?

All of it.

Never had any problems with adobe reader, maybe your comp is slow? Try google docs.

My comps decent enough: 2 gigs of ram, intel core 2 duo, 256 mb invidia graphics.

All of it.

You click a document and it opens in Acrobat Reader. Now you can read it.

How can they make it more user-friendly?

Yes it is a pain and greedy too

My comps decent enough: 2 gigs of ram, intel core 2 duo, 256 mb invidia graphics.
When I look at the task manager, AcroRd32.exe takes up 62 MB and barely taps the CPU. Firefox, on the other hand is using 17% of the CPU time and 131 MB. Plus, it looks like it has a memory leak -- now it's 131+.

And they both run okay in the foreground, or in the background. Very little change in the numbers.

Never heard of it, until now... While I was typing, that post rolled in.

What sorts of latencies do you see? I usually associate that word with real-time computing, not document viewing.

General slowness when viewing PDFs on my netbook. For all intents and purposes, I use Foxit on there because it's lighter on the limited resources. I only have a gig of ram to share between all my applications on my netbook, and it's often prudent to use other types of applications because the more universal ones like Acrobat, IE and MSN tend to use a significant amount of RAM. A netbook isn't a powerful machine, but it can be provided that one uses alternatives to the general applications.

My desktop is able to run Adobe Acrobat, but I found that it crashed and took far too long to open when compared with Adobe Acrobat. Then there's the risk of exploits in the program. Like IE, Adobe is the preferred target of malcontents aiming to disrupt. Most viruses and other malware written for the PDF extension exploit the weaknesses in Adobe Acrobat.

General slowness when viewing PDFs on my netbook. For all intents and purposes, I use Foxit on there because it's lighter on the limited resources. I only have a gig of ram to share between all my applications on my netbook, and it's often prudent to use other types of applications because the more universal ones like Acrobat, IE and MSN tend to use a significant amount of RAM. A netbook isn't a powerful machine, but it can be provided that one uses alternatives to the general applications.

My desktop is able to run Adobe Acrobat, but I found that it crashed and took far too long to open when compared with Adobe Acrobat. Then there's the risk of exploits in the program. Like IE, Adobe is the preferred target of malcontents aiming to disrupt. Most viruses and other malware written for the PDF extension exploit the weaknesses in Adobe Acrobat.
Good advice. I've only recently started using a HP Mini for some limited functions. Reading PDFs isn't one of them. But it won't hurt to go easy on the resources.

Thanks.

You click a document and it opens in Acrobat Reader. Now you can read it.

How can they make it more user-friendly?

Umm... just to throw a completely random, totally wild, and crazy guess out there... but maybe he's doing more than merely opening files? Maybe he has trouble with the executable for some reason.

You don't have to go out of your way to be a jerk for no reason.

On my netbook, I use Evince, and I rarely have any problems with it. But my work computer (and those of all users I support) uses Adobe Reader, and yeah, it kinda sucks.

Umm... just to throw a completely random, totally wild, and crazy guess out there... but maybe he's doing more than merely opening files? Maybe he has trouble with the executable for some reason.

You don't have to go out of your way to be a jerk for no reason.

Jerk? I am very polite.

I don't know which part he found not being userfriendly. I asked that one:

What part is not user-friendly?

His answer: all of it.

Well, that's including the opening and reading. Now, for me that is userfriendly, but my opinion doesn't matter, his opinion is more interesting. I really want to know it.

It seems everything all PDF, PDF and PDF while others are SWFs. It seems every site is using it and yes the quality of Acrobat is questionable.

It seems everything all PDF, PDF and PDF while others are SWFs. It seems every site is using it and yes the quality of Acrobat is questionable.

Also about the usability? And which part is not userfriendly according you?

Well, that's including the opening and reading. Now, for me that is userfriendly, but my opinion doesn't matter, his opinion is more interesting. I really want to know it.

I really can't be bothered to explain why I think it's unuser friendly. My biggest problem with it is its general slowness, and it's instability, especially when printing.

I really can't be bothered to explain why I think it's unuser friendly. My biggest problem with it is its general slowness, and it's instability, especially when printing.

I just got a new computer, on which it runs all but perfectly, but I have experience a lot of slowness from it myself.

It seems like it probably is a really bloated program.

I really can't be bothered to explain why I think it's unuser friendly. My biggest problem with it is its general slowness, and it's instability, especially when printing.

Ok. Performance and stability are usability items as well.

Is it safe to state, that when it was fast & stable then it was also userfriendly for you?

Jerk? I am very polite.

I don't know which part he found not being userfriendly. I asked that one:

What part is not user-friendly?

His answer: all of it.

Well, that's including the opening and reading. Now, for me that is userfriendly, but my opinion doesn't matter, his opinion is more interesting. I really want to know it.

My apologies, I read a very snappish and sarcastic tone.

Maybe you should try:

http://www.pdf2exe.com/reader.html

Is it safe to state, that when it was fast & stable then it was also userfriendly for you?

No. There were still problems. The text selection tool was buggy. You could never rely on it to work with the mouse wheel to scroll. That's just off the top of my head.

On the topic of being user-unfriendly, failing to load around one in four documents and regularly crashing when updating probably count for this for me. Well, it certainly made this user very unfriendly.

My apologies, I read a very snappish and sarcastic tone.

If you see things that aren't there then... ;)

No. There were still problems. The text selection tool was buggy. You could never rely on it to work with the mouse wheel to scroll. That's just off the top of my head.

Ok. That's indeed another usability item: expectation.

Yeah, it's a piece of crap.

No, your mum in bed is the shittiest thing ever.

I don't have nearly as much trouble with Adobe arcobat, as everyone here seems to. Its never crashed on me, and I like the quality of things that I put into acrobat, makes em look nice n' purdy. I would agree with the slowness thing although I don't find it a huge issue, and I regularly have 1000+ page pdf's to look through. Meh...

My comps decent enough: 2 gigs of ram, intel core 2 duo, 256 mb invidia graphics.

A description that vague means absolutely nothing to me. It could describe a really crappy computer or a very nice one. I would suggest installing the windows 7 release candidate. That will solve all of your computing problems.

Its not the shitties program ever. But it is an awful program.

Oh yes. Adobe is one of the suckiest programs I'd ever had the displeasure to use. It is slow, it crashes Firefox, it crashes the computer, it endlessly begs for updates when all I want for it is to read stuff! Don't really get what's so special about pdf when you have other file formats...

--snip--
Omigod, yes, one year ago an Adobe 'update' caused my computer to be infected with malware and the poor thing crashed. Had to reformat my computer. Lost many files, I tell you. That's why I hated Adobe some more. :mad:

Thanks for the link. I'll check that out.

Yes it is a piece shit, and no, I don't know of any way to make it faster. I don't use it; I use FOXIT (http://www.foxitsoftware.com/pdf/reader/download.php).
Danke.

Never had a problem with Acrobat or Reader.

Not once.

Then again, I'm on a Mac.

All of Adobe's programs are horribly buggy bloatware.

No, your mum in bed is the shittiest thing ever.

She did alright last night. Maybe you just weren't doing it for her.

I'm on a Mac.

You're opinion is irrelevant:p.

I'll just say that PDF in italian is dubbed "Porco D'un File".

Everytime I see Adobe Acrobat Reader I thank Jebus that I have a Mac and preview does exactly what I need it to do :)

It seems that many people do not like Adobe Reader.
And there are alternatives, which are enjoyed better by the users on this forum.

So why is Adobe Reader the standard in this kind of software?

It seems that many people do not like Adobe Reader.
And there are alternatives, which are enjoyed better by the users on this forum.

So why is Adobe Reader the standard in this kind of software?

Cause it is the most well known?

Everywhere where I go and they have a pdf they link to Adobes homepage for people who do not have any software to open pdf.

Cause it is the most well known?

Everywhere where I go and they have a pdf they link to Adobes homepage for people who do not have any software to open pdf.

Yes, but you would expect, due the internet, that bad things are replaced rather fast.

IMHO, Adobe Reader has something the others are not providing.

Yes, but you would expect, due the internet, that bad things are replaced rather fast.

IMHO, Adobe Reader has something the others are not providing.

People still use Internet Explorer even if it is the worst alternative of web browsers IMO.

For me AR works quite good except that it sometimes is a bit slow so have no real reason to change even if there are better alternative. I guess it is the same for most people who doesn't use pdf to often.

why is Adobe Reader the standard in this kind of software?
Because up until last year .pdf was ostensibly a proprietary format, 'owned' by Adobe, and so any provider who was offering content in .pdf format was only legally allowed to link to Adobe Acrobat (or Reader, or whatever they're calling it these days) as a way to read the files.

There were, of course, numerous alternatives before it became an open standard, but it's only since the middle of last year that other organisations could promote their own applications for using .pdf files without potentially being bullied into silence by Adobe.

People still use Internet Explorer even if it is the worst alternative of web browsers IMO.

For me AR works quite good except that it sometimes is a bit slow so have no real reason to change even if there are better alternative. I guess it is the same for most people who doesn't use pdf to often.

Yes, that's true. But once there was Netscape, which is virtually replaced by IE.

Recently I changed to Chrome and with me rather a lot people. I like Chrome a lot, it's FTL and is very user-friendly. I like the minimalistic design.

It seems that many people do not like Adobe Reader.
And there are alternatives, which are enjoyed better by the users on this forum.

So why is Adobe Reader the standard in this kind of software?

PDF was a proprietary Adobe format until last year.

It seems everything all PDF, PDF and PDF while others are SWFs. It seems every site is using it and yes the quality of Acrobat is questionable.

I agree...Flash & PDF are absolute turd, webwise.

PDF is a good document format as long as it's used solely for offline documents. PDF + online reading is in my opinion a horrible combo.

Flash would be good but the performance is, well, horrible doesn't even begin to describe it.


If Acrobat seems slow/resource hog there are two things you can try:

- Downgrade: Acrobat Reader 6&7 open practically all documents perfectly and are much much lighter than the new turds. 6 is by far my favourite version, though I'm using 7 now.

- Kill the quick launcher (is there some other way than through msconfig?): The benefit you gain from it is minimal compared to the resources it is taking - In case you have to open multiple PDF documents just don't close the application in between.

Acrobat Reader is slow but it has a few features which most other readers don't have. 1) Suppot for Forms - so you can fill out your tax forms in the reader and then print it out. 2) Builtin OCR which works pretty well so you can search scanned documents. 3) Column detection so you can cut and paste out of Articles without getting two columns on one line. I do find it slow but it's not that bad. Untill recently I was using it regularly on a 1.7Ghz Centrino laptop with 1 gig ram ...under linux.

"Adobe Systems has acknowledged that all versions of its Adobe Reader, including editions for Windows, the Mac and Linux, contain at least one, and possibly two, critical vulnerabilities. 'All currently supported shipping versions of Adobe Reader and Acrobat, [Versions] 9.1, 8.1.4 and 7.1.1 and earlier, are vulnerable to this issue,'

http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/04/29/1823234&from=rss

PDF was a proprietary Adobe format until last year.

It was proprietary but also open - and you could support it royalty free; OpenOffice.org, Evince, Apple etc all use PDF and don't pay a single cent to Adobe. The specifications have been open for quite some time from Adobe.

The ISO specification relating to PDF will always be behind the 8th balls since Adobe will create an update, submit it to ISO, then several months later it officially becomes a standard to which applications are updated and thus they are 1 year or so behind Adobes own products.

I don't like pdf either.

Adobe reminds me of Windows; with every update, it gets worse.

It seems that many people do not like Adobe Reader.
And there are alternatives, which are enjoyed better by the users on this forum.

So why is Adobe Reader the standard in this kind of software?

Largely for the same reasons Windows is the most popular OS and Internet Explorer is the most popular web browser, despite the fact that they're both horrible.

You're opinion is irrelevant:p.

Bite me, fanboy. ;)