| Author |
what's with adobe acrobat reader - 27 mb? for a reader?
|
|
| west.fairview@gmail.com 2005-11-19, 3:14 am |
| hi,
tried to download the latest acrobat reader and it is a whopping
27mb!!!
the last version i think was only 5-6 mb?
it is just a reader!!! the file size is bigger than my CAD software
download...
gee...i just upgraded my hd to 120 gb/512 mb ram... thought that it
would be
enough for my softwares and here comes the next versions of softwares
and
it is going to eat up all my space and memory...
you just can't keep up with the requirements anymore!!!
| |
|
| <west.fairview@XXXXXXXXXX> wrote in message news:1132374178.977947.15620@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> hi,
> tried to download the latest acrobat reader and it is a whopping
> 27mb!!!
> the last version i think was only 5-6 mb?
> it is just a reader!!! the file size is bigger than my CAD software
> download...
> gee...i just upgraded my hd to 120 gb/512 mb ram... thought that it
> would be
> enough for my softwares and here comes the next versions of softwares
> and
> it is going to eat up all my space and memory...
> you just can't keep up with the requirements anymore!!!
Ridiculous isn't it? Absolute Bloatware.
| |
| Doug Warner 2005-11-19, 6:16 pm |
| west.fairview@XXXXXXXXXX wrote:
>hi,
>tried to download the latest acrobat reader and it is a whopping
>27mb!!!
>the last version i think was only 5-6 mb?
I went back to version 5 at work, There are several issues I can't
stand with 6 plus:
1. The search frame takes up too much screen real-estate on small
monitors. The document is unreadable with search open.
2. Search always starts from the beginning, Older versions would let
you search from the current page.
3. In version 6, if you have PDF's open in web browser windows, and a
local PDF open in the reader, you can't close the reader window
without also closing all the browser ones as well. This leaves the
taskbar cluttered with an addtional program entry. In V5, you could
close the stand alone reader while keeping the browser documents,.
--
Email reply: please remove one letter from each side of "@"
Spammers are Scammers. Exterminate them.
| |
| Nicholas Sherlock 2005-11-19, 10:14 pm |
| west.fairview@XXXXXXXXXX wrote:
> tried to download the latest acrobat reader and it is a whopping
> 27mb!!!
Easy, they split their application up into heaps of smaller parts. Each
of these parts probably includes 200-300k of standard code, duplicated
for every part.
Cheers,
Nicholas Sherlock
| |
| Lorem Ipsum 2005-11-19, 10:14 pm |
| "Nicholas Sherlock" <n_sherlock@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:dlojsv$jap$2@lust.ihug.co.nz...
> west.fairview@XXXXXXXXXX wrote:
>
> Easy, they split their application up into heaps of smaller parts. Each of
> these parts probably includes 200-300k of standard code, duplicated for
> every part.
What sense does that make?
| |
|
| "Lorem Ipsum" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message news:11nvlsdsuot1651@news.supernews.com...
> "Nicholas Sherlock" <n_sherlock@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:dlojsv$jap$2@lust.ihug.co.nz...
>
> What sense does that make?
I don't think that's accurate, or has anything to do with Acrobat's
bloat. It has more to do with Abobe (in usual fashion) getting their
foot in the door with a proprietary standard, and trying to pry it
open a bit further with each successive version of Acrobat.
Don't forget the roots of Acrobat. It was foisted upon us by a
tiny group of diehard unix and Apple propeller heads who needed
platform transparency to communicate with the 90+% of the world
who use Windows. If it weren't for these boobs Acrobat would
have long since died the death it deserves.
| |
| Lorem Ipsum 2005-11-19, 10:14 pm |
| "Glen" <nospam@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:_RQff.2578$wf.1726@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> I don't think that's accurate, or has anything to do with Acrobat's
> bloat. It has more to do with Abobe (in usual fashion) getting their
> foot in the door with a proprietary standard, and trying to pry it
> open a bit further with each successive version of Acrobat.
But what do they have to gain with bloated code?
> Don't forget the roots of Acrobat. It was foisted upon us by a
> tiny group of diehard unix and Apple propeller heads who needed
> platform transparency to communicate with the 90+% of the world
> who use Windows. If it weren't for these boobs Acrobat would
> have long since died the death it deserves.
That's just silly.
| |
| Nicholas Sherlock 2005-11-19, 10:14 pm |
| Lorem Ipsum wrote:
> "Nicholas Sherlock" <n_sherlock@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:dlojsv$jap$2@lust.ihug.co.nz...
>
>
>
> What sense does that make?
It allows the application to be easily extended by adding more modules.
Cheers,
Nicholas Sherlock
| |
| Lorem Ipsum 2005-11-20, 3:15 am |
| "Nicholas Sherlock" <n_sherlock@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:dlope7$u4p$1@lust.ihug.co.nz...
>
> It allows the application to be easily extended by adding more modules.
In "my day" we didn't repeat the code. Called routines shared memory and
pspace.
| |
| Nicholas Sherlock 2005-11-20, 3:15 am |
| Lorem Ipsum wrote:
> "Nicholas Sherlock" <n_sherlock@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:dlope7$u4p$1@lust.ihug.co.nz...
>
>
>
>
> In "my day" we didn't repeat the code. Called routines shared memory and
> pspace.
Duplicated code was only my conjecture, I don't know if Adobe really
shares code or not. Shared code has one disadvantage, it makes your
modules have complex dependencies on other modules. With the trend
towards increasing hard drive space and bandwidth, Adobe may have
decided that the increased file size was worth avoiding dependency hell.
Cheers,
Nicholas Sherlock
| |
| rumpledickskin 2005-11-22, 6:14 pm |
|
> With the trend
>towards increasing hard drive space and bandwidth, Adobe may have
>decided that the increased file size was worth avoiding dependency hell.
>
>Cheers,
>Nicholas Sherlock
Sorta like Windows.
| |
| john@world.com 2005-11-22, 6:14 pm |
| On 18 Nov 2005 20:22:59 -0800, west.fairview@XXXXXXXXXX wrote:
>hi,
>tried to download the latest acrobat reader and it is a whopping
>27mb!!!
>the last version i think was only 5-6 mb?
>it is just a reader!!! the file size is bigger than my CAD software
>download...
>gee...i just upgraded my hd to 120 gb/512 mb ram... thought that it
>would be
>enough for my softwares and here comes the next versions of softwares
>and
>it is going to eat up all my space and memory...
>you just can't keep up with the requirements anymore!!!
Well at least they have given up the idea of charging for the reader.
They tried that originally. Hate to think what 27 MB might cost if
they had kept that business model except they would not be producting
Acrobat by now.
John
|
|
|
|
| Copyright 2003 - 2008 forum4designers.com Software forum Computer Hardware reviews |