Adobe Reader 9.0

http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/readstep2.html

Improvements range from performance to security. It also has native flash support to enable movies and animation within the files. Enjoy!

 

Thanks for the info.

 

34 MB

 

Thanks for the info. I'll install it but still use Foxit Reader as my default .pdf reader

 

No problem guys. Yup opening files on the internet in opera is definitely quicker.

 

I'd never install Adobe Reader again. It was bloated, buggy, and constantly "phoning home."

Sumatra is a lot better.

 

Thank you for the data,

+rep

 

. since when is opera reyling on adobe to open file quicker?
. pdf files?
. all files?
. would that statement belong to another thread?

cheers ...

 

Nooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Not that anything but that!!!

 

care to expand the "Noooo..."?

cheers ...

 

bah no adobe for me never again as long as i have foxit.. adobe is simply way to big and way to much to simply open pdf's

 

If you don't mind me asking, what type of problems did you experience?

 

New and more bloated than ever, introducing Adobe Reader 9.0!

 

First, the "installer" was ~30MB and it was hosted at 150KB/s, which is pretty slow. Then it turns out it wasn't an installer, it was an "updater" that downloaded the actual installer. It proceeded to download a whole bunch of other stuff (after I allowed it through the firewall) and when it was done, PDFs didn't display. I restarted and tried. IE7 crashed when I tried to load a PDF. So I tried saving it to the desktop and manually opening it. My computer locked up for a moment (no mouse) while the file opened. Then I was interrupted by a pop-up asking if Adobe Updater could update itself with a 87MB download. After I uninstalled it, I used CCleaner to clean out about 100 registry errors Adobe Reader's uninstaller left behind. Besides usability, Adobe Reader has had a lot of security vulnerabilities. The only good thing about Adobe Reader is that it has the best PDF text rendering of all the PDF readers i've seen. Sumatra's a lot less annoying to use (much faster) and install (it's a portable app and has no updaters).

 

Flash is annoying enough in HTML pages, with all the ads flying around the pages and stuff. I really don't need it in PDFs too. Besides, I just don't see the purpose of having Flash in PDFs.

 

I uninstalled Adobe Reader 8, installed Adobe Reader 9, and prompty uninstalled Adobe Reader 9.

HUGE. Bloated. A beta acrobat.web product that gave me no choice as to whether to install or not.

I looked at Foxit, again, and decided to against it and installed PDF XChange to try out for now.

 

Is it really that much worse?

 

Let's put it this way. Adobe Reader 8 had two entries in ZoneAlarm: The reader itself and the updater. I stopped counting at 8 entries for Adobe Reader 9.

 

I have both foxit and AR9.0 on my system, I loaded the biggest pdf i could find an animé story 200 pages, and AR9.0 slowed right down, almost to a stop.

So i loaded the same file in Foxit Reader and it super fast, no sign of slowdown.

bye bye AR9.0

 

More than Norton?

 

Thanks for the info! Downloading now!

 

Yup. If Adobe doesn't hit you with it's massive size, its updates will.

 

OMG if it's this bad... you guys gotta tell me some good free alternatives!

 

Foxit Reader.

 

There are obviously something that Foxit cannot do . If you got a good machine when do trade off a few cpu power / cycle for some comforts . I'm seeing lots of people with beefy machine yet still try to save the cpu gauge. That's waste.

 

True, but when I have a beefy machine and opening pdf files still lags in Adobe Reader, it's not worth it. I use Foxit because it opens instantly and does not lag when scrolling through large documents. I have yet to encounter a time when I needed a feature from Adobe Reader that was not present in Foxit (but since I rarely do much other than read a pdf, that's easy to say).

 

@|Crash|: yeah it's really depends on what you want and if the trade-off does the job.

Pdf format is gaining the iso standard, I assume next generation OS will have it embedded, then we only need the reader for some other comforts.


The funny thing is the development cycle of "bloatware"

Tiny software but good => People want more features including the bling bling ... => Software house try to address everybody => Software becomes bulky => People label the software as "bloat" => Looking for the next tiny app and leave the big "bloat" for the rest .. and it's going on and create a new cycle

 

PDF-XChange is what I am currently trying out

 

I have not run Norton in this century, so cannot say.

 

I used to see that even 25 years ago, where folks were lamenting the inefficiencies of programmers and spending big bucks on code walkthroughs.

I say to hire competent programmers. They will write tight code. Then throw hardware at it. It is cheaper than people.

I have no issue whatsoever with having 4GB of memory on my PC. For goodness sake, I ran your entire infrastructure on 64K and then upgraded to 256K on the early mainframes.

What I do have objections to, and Adobe is currently guilty of this, is incorporating processes and features into their products that benefit only them, not you, the user.

 

I completely agree.

What makes this better than Foxit, in your opinion?

 

I do not have any personal experience at this time upon which to base a claim of "better" (or "worse", for that matter). What I do have is the opinions of a number of folks who are claiming that PDF-XChange opens PDF files that Foxit balks at and that PDF-XChange is quicker and has a smaller footprint than Foxit.

I am trying it out right now. Unless it presents some reason to not keep it, I probably will keep it. After all, I kept Adobe Reader for decades until it gave me enough reasons to drop it.

 

If it's not asking too much, could you let me know what you experience once you have a chance to play around with it a bit?

 

It opens quickly, allows changes to existing PDFs (will not allow the creation of a new PDF), scrolls and displays everything I have thrown at it so far. Have not tried printing yet.

 

Sounds good. Thanks, AKAJohn.