I find it absolutely shady that Adobe still insists that people download and use their stuff. To bad Windows doesn't run things in a sandbox, like the mac does. That way, users would be aware, oh my gosh, adobe is trying to install something else on my pc, let me just click this button that tells this crap to go away. I can't tell you how many times the adobe updater has popped up demanding that I update to the latest revision of Acrobat pdf reader. IF only there was that glorious little checkbox to not bug me about this anymore! I always have to click remind me later. And what does it do? It takes my request, files it away, and reminds me the next time I open it up and try to read a pdf file. Shady company indeed.
On Jan 30, 2010, at 9:19 AM, Bryan Smart wrote: > And it blows my mind how they've been able to get everyone to conform. I just > don't get it at all. I mean, for most people, they need Acrobat Reader in > order to read PDF documents on a PC. Acrobat Reader has been treated by > Adobe, not so much as a way to make the documents that their professional > tools produce to be read for free, but as a vector to get as much of their > stuff as possible on to your PC. You want to read PDF files? Well, of course > that means that you'd also like us to install plug ins for everything from > ebook management to real-time spell checking of PDFs. Also, just in case you > need it, how about we install stuff to help you produce PDFs through > adobe.com? And since all of this stuff that we just added, that you didn't > ask for, is always having security problems, how about we install this > updater software that will run in the background and constantly nag you to > update all of the bits that you didn't request in the first place. And, hey, > while we're updating, how about we install some other stuff that you didn't > request and don't want. I don't know how IT departments haven't banned > Acrobat Reader as a security risk. It seems that way to me. > > And, when it comes down to its core function, you know, reading PDF files, > Acrobat Reader is horribly slow at that task. I used to think that PDFs must > be this big bloated document format, but I've realized in the past few years > that PDFs aren't the problem, the problem is Acrobat Reader. Other PDF > reading tools are quite snappy. Its unfortunate for Windows users that > Acrobat Reader is the only reading tool that is both accessible, and is > blessed by Adobe with access to encrypted/secured PDF files. I know there are > converters and other accessible readers, but those won't work if the file is > secured or encrypted. > > Adobe reminds me of Real Networks. Do any of you remember Real Player? That's > how we used to stream audio and video before Flash. Of course, hardly anyone > uses the Real Player formats or player any longer. The big reason for that is > they took the fact that so many people installed their software as an > opportunity to bundle all sorts of crapware with it. I suppose Adobe is > better, since they aren't including Google and Yahoo toolbars, 50 free MP3s > from EMusic.com, Weather Bug, a free trial of Mcafee Security Suite, and $10 > off at Amazon.com on your next purchase of $30 or more, but they're still > including lots of unnecessary and bloated extras that run slowly and are > infested with security problems. > > And people continue to use their stuff why? They seem like a shady company, > far from professional, and their practices say to me that they don't respect > or value their customers. > > Bryan > > -----Original Message----- > From: macvisionaries@googlegroups.com > [mailto:macvisionar...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Chris Hofstader > Sent: Saturday, January 30, 2010 8:05 AM > To: macvisionaries@googlegroups.com > Subject: Re: apple and adobe zeitgeist fallout > > For years, Adobe's behavior has been a paradox wrapped in an enigma and coded > with deep encryption. > On Jan 30, 2010, at 7:52 AM, Yuma Antoine Decaux wrote: > >> Yes you are right, some of apple's stuff is also still carbon, but i >> remember somewhere saying adobe didn't want to jump the coco bandwagon. Why >> is what i am looking for. >> >> best >> >> Yuma >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "MacVisionaries" group. >> To post to this group, send email to macvisionar...@googlegroups.com. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en. >> > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "MacVisionaries" group. > To post to this group, send email to macvisionar...@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "MacVisionaries" group. > To post to this group, send email to macvisionar...@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MacVisionaries" group. To post to this group, send email to macvisionar...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en.
