Acrobat 9 - a disaster

[Dov Isaacs]

Guy,

See previous responses. Yes, there are UI differences between
Acrobat and Reader, but unless you are invoking rather complex
Javascript routines that invoke functions that are allowed in
Acrobat but not Reader, other than font issues (you should NEVER,
repeat NEVER, repeat once again NEVER generate PDF files with
unembedded fonts), you should not see any real differences between
rendering in Acrobat versus Reader - and the font issue itself
would mean that you need to run in a separate environment to gauge
the effects of unembedded fonts.

	- Dov

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Guy K. Haas [mailto:guy at hiskeyboard.com]
> Sent: Sunday, July 25, 2010 7:57 AM
> To: Dov Isaacs
> Cc: Framers E-mail List
> Subject: Re: Acrobat 9 - a disaster
> 
> But, Dov---
> 
> I have both installed so that when a reviewer runs into a problem, I can
> "see it their way".  The interfaces of the two are so different that
> it's sometimes handy to be able to do this.
> 
> Would it be any less "NOT RECOMMENDED" if one had the Reader on a
> removable drive (such as a USB drive) and plugged it in only when needed?
> 
> --Guy K. Haas
>    Software Exegete in Silicon Valley
> 
> 
> On 7/25/2010 7:23 AM, Dov Isaacs wrote:
> > Although you CAN have both Reader and Acrobat installed simultaneously
> > (assuming the same version), it is very strongly NOT RECOMMENDED for a
> > number of very good reasons. It certainly does not add any functionality
> > to one's system. Having said that, I will add that having both Reader and
> > Acrobat of the same version on a system is most unlikely to cause the
> > symptoms described.
> >
> > 	- Dov
>