Freeware PDF Reader

[Carl]

I have created a Windows partition on a MacBook, 32GB in size.

I am trying to avoid filling it up with "bloatware" applications like
Adobe Acrobat Reader. On my Mac, the Adobe Reader hogs 113.5MB of HD
space. I replaced it with a freeware application called Skim, which
takes only 9.3MB of HD space and is every bit as good, if not better,
than Adobe Acrobat Reader.

Can anyone recommend a freeware .pdf reader they like to replace AA
Reader on my Windows XP partition?

Many thanks.
Carl

 

[Bruce Chambers]

I have created a Windows partition on a MacBook, 32GB in size.

I am trying to avoid filling it up with "bloatware" applications like
Adobe Acrobat Reader. On my Mac, the Adobe Reader hogs 113.5MB of HD
space. I replaced it with a freeware application called Skim, which
takes only 9.3MB of HD space and is every bit as good, if not better,
than Adobe Acrobat Reader.

Can anyone recommend a freeware .pdf reader they like to replace AA
Reader on my Windows XP partition?

Many thanks.
Carl

Foxit Reader
http://www.foxitsoftware.com/


--

Bruce Chambers

Help us help you:



They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. ~Benjamin Franklin

Many people would rather die than think; in fact, most do. ~Bertrand Russell

The philosopher has never killed any priests, whereas the priest has
killed a great many philosophers.
~ Denis Diderot

 

[Gerry]

Carl

I endorse Bruce's recommendation of Foxit. Works fine for me.

--



Hope this helps.

Gerry
~~~~
FCA
Stourport, England
Enquire, plan and execute
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

[Don Schmidt]

PDF-XChange Viewer

http://www.docu-track.com/downloads/users/

 

[Ken Blake, MVP]

I have created a Windows partition on a MacBook, 32GB in size.

I am trying to avoid filling it up with "bloatware" applications like
Adobe Acrobat Reader. On my Mac, the Adobe Reader hogs 113.5MB of HD
space.

I know nothing about the Macintosh, but Adobe Reader 8.0 takes 156MB
here.

You can call it "hogging" and "bloatware" if you want, but considering
that you can buy an 80GB drive for under $50, that 156GB is about $.10
US worth of disk space. On a bigger hard drive, it's even less than a
dime.

To me, that's inconsequential and nothing to get excited about. I
think it's appropriate to choose applications based on things like
performance, features, cost, etc, not on whether one uses up a few
pennies worth more of disk space than another.

I replaced it with a freeware application called Skim, which
takes only 9.3MB of HD space and is every bit as good, if not better,
than Adobe Acrobat Reader.

If you like it better, then fine. That's a good reason to use it. The
disk space it saves you is not.

Can anyone recommend a freeware .pdf reader they like to replace AA
Reader on my Windows XP partition?

I'm personally happy enough with Adobe Reader, and see no compelling
reason to look for alternatives. But many other people prefer the free
Foxit, and you might want to try it. But again I urge you to evaluate
it based on features and performance, not on how much disk space it
takes up.

 

[John Q. Smith]

I know nothing about the Macintosh, but Adobe Reader 8.0 takes 156MB
here.

You can call it "hogging" and "bloatware" if you want, but considering
that you can buy an 80GB drive for under $50, that 156GB is about $.10
US worth of disk space. On a bigger hard drive, it's even less than a
dime.

To me, that's inconsequential and nothing to get excited about. I
think it's appropriate to choose applications based on things like
performance, features, cost, etc, not on whether one uses up a few
pennies worth more of disk space than another.




If you like it better, then fine. That's a good reason to use it. The
disk space it saves you is not.




I'm personally happy enough with Adobe Reader, and see no compelling
reason to look for alternatives. But many other people prefer the free
Foxit, and you might want to try it. But again I urge you to evaluate
it based on features and performance, not on how much disk space it
takes up.

I agree with this post!

 

[Carl]

If you like it better, then fine. That's a good reason to use it. The
disk space it saves you is not.

Thanks for the thoughtful reply, Ken.

My situation is this: I just got an entry-level MacBook which came with
a HD with 80GB.

Only after receiving it did I decide to install Windows XP and when I
did so, choose a 15GB partition because I intended to use Windows to do
some things with my GPS that are better supported under Windows than
they are under Macintosh.

So, you can see disc space is at a premium. I tossed Apple's iTunes
which I don't intend to use, and that saved me a ton of space. The
anti-virus program I received came with instructions in PDF format and
so I needed something to read them. Hated to eat up so much disc space
with Adobe just to read a document or two.

I'll check out the reader you suggested.

 

[Carl]

Foxit Reader
http://www.foxitsoftware.com/

Thanks, Bruce, will check it out. Carl

 

[Carl]

PDF-XChange Viewer

http://www.docu-track.com/downloads/users/

Thanks, Don, will take a look at this one. Carl

 

[Ken Blake, MVP]

Thanks for the thoughtful reply, Ken.

You're welcome. Glad to help.

My situation is this: I just got an entry-level MacBook which came with
a HD with 80GB.

Only after receiving it did I decide to install Windows XP and when I
did so, choose a 15GB partition because I intended to use Windows to do
some things with my GPS that are better supported under Windows than
they are under Macintosh.

So, you can see disc space is at a premium.

OK, then your situation is a little different and the small amount of
disk space that is involved here is more significant to you than to
most of us.

 

[Daave]

I endorse Gerry's endorsement.

Carl

I endorse Bruce's recommendation of Foxit. Works fine for me.

 

[Fuzzy Logic]

I have created a Windows partition on a MacBook, 32GB in size.

I am trying to avoid filling it up with "bloatware" applications like
Adobe Acrobat Reader. On my Mac, the Adobe Reader hogs 113.5MB of HD
space. I replaced it with a freeware application called Skim, which
takes only 9.3MB of HD space and is every bit as good, if not better,
than Adobe Acrobat Reader.

Can anyone recommend a freeware .pdf reader they like to replace AA
Reader on my Windows XP partition?

Many thanks.
Carl

Adobe Digital Editions will do it. Requires Flash.

 

[WaIIy]

Adobe Digital Editions will do it. Requires Flash.

Foxit is highly regarded. I use it rather than the AA 80 meg piece of
bloat.

 

[Fuzzy Logic]

Foxit is highly regarded. I use it rather than the AA 80 meg piece of
bloat.

Adobe Digital Editions is 3MB.

 

[bojimbo26]

Adobe Digital Editions is 3MB.

Adobe installed and working 7.59 MB - Foxit 3.92 MB

 

[Fuzzy Logic]

Adobe installed and working 7.59 MB - Foxit 3.92 MB

Size isn't everything;-)

 

[DanS]

I know nothing about the Macintosh, but Adobe Reader 8.0 takes 156MB
here.

You can call it "hogging" and "bloatware" if you want, but considering
that you can buy an 80GB drive for under $50, that 156GB is about $.10
US worth of disk space. On a bigger hard drive, it's even less than a
dime.

To me, that's inconsequential and nothing to get excited about. I
think it's appropriate to choose applications based on things like
performance, features, cost, etc, not on whether one uses up a few
pennies worth more of disk space than another.

While your last _sentence_ I can agree with, the attitude of 'HDD space is
so cheap who cares how big it is' however, I can not.

What ever happened to efficient programmers ? Some of the banking
application's of days gone by had been programmed using assembly code and
are under 64K in size.

Obviously (virtually) noone codes in assembly anymore, but you've got to
wonder why these apps take up soooo much space for what they really
accomplish.

 

[WaIIy]

While your last _sentence_ I can agree with, the attitude of 'HDD space is
so cheap who cares how big it is' however, I can not.

What ever happened to efficient programmers ? Some of the banking
application's of days gone by had been programmed using assembly code and
are under 64K in size.

Obviously (virtually) noone codes in assembly anymore, but you've got to
wonder why these apps take up soooo much space for what they really
accomplish.

Agreed, Acrobat Reader is even bigger than bloatware, it's HippoWare ©

By nature, it's sluggish. Who moves faster, a Leopard or a Hippo?

 

[bojimbo26]

(e-mail address removed) wrote in

Size isn't everything;-)

Totally agree )