What is your favorite PDF reader?

  • Thread starter Thread starter casey.o
  • Start date Start date
C

casey.o

I've never liked Adobe Acrobat, or PDF reader. (I think they stopped
using the word Acrobat several years ago). Anyhow, years ago, I began
using Foxit reader. Back then it worked well, and Foxit advertised it
as being small and fast, and lacking connections to the internet, and so
on.....They compared their early version as beng 1.5 megs compared to
what they said the SLOW Adobe reader, which was a 20+meg file.

Well, that has all changed. I have been using Foxit version 2.x (last
of the vers 2), which was the last version for Win98. Well, lately,
that version locks up quite often. Not the OS, just itself. I suppose
it's due to all the extra stuff they are adding to new PDF files, which
includea Java scripts. [comment]. I hate Java Script. It seems to
wreck everything it touches and is the #1 cause of browser lockups, and
now PDF readers..... Not to mention it's a gateway to allow malware
into a computer.

Anyhow, I tried to install a newer version of Foxit on Win98, and
although ver 3.0 is not listed to run on Win98, it does work. But it's
still prone to locking up on soem PDF files.

On my XP computer, I installed version 5.x It's now gone the sazme
direction as Adobe. It's loaded with bloat, continuously opens my
browser (which that computer is not connected to the internet), has a
lot of advertising when the start page opens, amd contains a toolbar to
Ask.com, which attempted to change my browser homepage to Ask.com.
And 5.x is not the latest version. The latest is 6.x (I think it's
6.1). That file is close to 32 megs. In other words, they have
abandoned the fast and simple, and gone the same way as Adobe.

I decided to see what alternatives exist to replace BOTH Adobe and
Foxit. That's when I found this website:
Five Best PDF Readers.
http://lifehacker.com/5328211/five-best-pdf-readers

By a long run, the chosen reader is PDF-XChange

61.36% (11,673 votes)

With the next two as

Foxit 20.87% (3,970 votes)

Adobe Reader 6.95% (1,322 votes)

It looks like PDF-XChange wins by a huge margin.

I just downloaded it. Seems pretty good sdo far....
 
| http://lifehacker.com/5328211/five-best-pdf-readers
|
| By a long run, the chosen reader is PDF-XChange
|
| 61.36% (11,673 votes)
|
| With the next two as
|
| Foxit 20.87% (3,970 votes)
|
| Adobe Reader 6.95% (1,322 votes)
|
| It looks like PDF-XChange wins by a huge margin.
|
| I just downloaded it. Seems pretty good so far....
|

I noticed the article says PDF-XChange won't export
text in the free version, but I just tried it out and it seems
to be fully functional. There's no Save As or Export for
TXT. There isn't even Edit -> Select All, which is awkward.
But one can do Ctrl + A and then do a copy and paste
into Notepad.

Some of the functions like that seem to be poorly
designed. Too many menu choices, yet not enough. And
so far I haven't figured out how to show a table of contents
for books. But it's interesting. I think I'll try it out more.
As far as I can tell, nothing relevant has been left out of
the free version. I opened my form 1040 for 2013 and was
able to edit the fields, which I don't think is possible in
most readers.

For the most part, I use PDF readers to convert to text.
A PDF is awkward to read, unless it's something like a
manual with diagrams. And in general I don't find the text
rendering as crisp as plain text. But occasionally it is nice
to be able to edit fields.

It did require a few settings changes, like disabling
javascript and removing "Search Providers". Providing
online search links in a PDF editor/viewer is a good example
of someone who's already started sliding down the
slippery slope of bloat. As is "Open from URL". I'd be
more comfortable if the program had no online
functionality at all. Hopefully they'll have the sense
not to slide further. :)
 
I use Foxit Reader 2.3 on XP.

It never locks up or fails to display a PDF document.
The only changes to the Reader is I went to their site and downloaded more
recent addons for viewing jpegs etc.

I wouldn't mind taking a look at a sample of a PDF that locks up for you, if
you could upload it somewhere.
 
I've never liked Adobe Acrobat, or PDF reader. (I think they stopped
using the word Acrobat several years ago). Anyhow, years ago, I began
using Foxit reader. Back then it worked well, and Foxit advertised it
as being small and fast, and lacking connections to the internet, and so
on.....They compared their early version as beng 1.5 megs compared to
what they said the SLOW Adobe reader, which was a 20+meg file.

Well, that has all changed. I have been using Foxit version 2.x (last
of the vers 2), which was the last version for Win98. Well, lately,
that version locks up quite often. Not the OS, just itself. I suppose
it's due to all the extra stuff they are adding to new PDF files, which
includea Java scripts. [comment]. I hate Java Script. It seems to
wreck everything it touches and is the #1 cause of browser lockups, and
now PDF readers..... Not to mention it's a gateway to allow malware
into a computer.
Click to expand...

It would not surprise me at all if the hang ups were due to a file's
contents. I learned a long, long time ago, PDF files seem to be a
moving target. Unless you run a PDF reader that is up to date, sooner
or later you'll have something your older reader cannot handle.
Anyhow, I tried to install a newer version of Foxit on Win98, and
although ver 3.0 is not listed to run on Win98, it does work. But it's
still prone to locking up on soem PDF files.

On my XP computer, I installed version 5.x It's now gone the sazme
direction as Adobe. It's loaded with bloat, continuously opens my
browser (which that computer is not connected to the internet), has a
lot of advertising when the start page opens, amd contains a toolbar to
Ask.com, which attempted to change my browser homepage to Ask.com.
And 5.x is not the latest version. The latest is 6.x (I think it's
6.1). That file is close to 32 megs. In other words, they have
abandoned the fast and simple, and gone the same way as Adobe.
Click to expand...

I've been sitting here wondering, just what is the definition of bloat,
and do all people think bloat is the same thing. A trip to Wikipedia,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_bloat, confirms that it can mean
different things to different people. I'm thinking your definition is
the one where features are added that you have no use for. But there
will be others who want those features. That type of bloat is a given,
I think, as computers and software evolve into more powerful products.
There's no way to avoid that.

To me, bloat would be more and more inefficient program code.

I wonder if the constant opening of your browser is Foxit trying to
"phone home". Since the computer is not connected to the internet,
Foxit may just keep trying.
I decided to see what alternatives exist to replace BOTH Adobe and
Foxit. That's when I found this website:
Five Best PDF Readers.
http://lifehacker.com/5328211/five-best-pdf-readers

By a long run, the chosen reader is PDF-XChange

61.36% (11,673 votes)

With the next two as

Foxit 20.87% (3,970 votes)

Adobe Reader 6.95% (1,322 votes)

It looks like PDF-XChange wins by a huge margin.

I just downloaded it. Seems pretty good sdo far....
Click to expand...

I wouldn't put much stock in that article, it's 6 years old. The
screenshot of Foxit is version 3, a lot older than the version 6 you say
is current. And if you read the comments, someone suggested the polling
had become skewed.

In Windows, I use a reader called Nitro PDF,
http://www.nitropdf.com/pdf-reader. I had tired Foxit a few years ago
under Vista, but had problems with some PDFs. Details have been forgotten.

I found both readers in a search for a free PDF printer driver so I
could create PDF files using the print routine, which is standard in OS X.

--
Ken
Mac OS X 10.8.5
Firefox 25.0
Thunderbird 24.3.0
"My brain is like lightning, a quick flash
and it's gone!"
 
| I've been sitting here wondering, just what is the definition of bloat,
| and do all people think bloat is the same thing. A trip to Wikipedia,
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_bloat, confirms that it can mean
| different things to different people. I'm thinking your definition is
| the one where features are added that you have no use for. But there
| will be others who want those features. That type of bloat is a given,
| I think, as computers and software evolve into more powerful products.
| There's no way to avoid that.
|
| To me, bloat would be more and more inefficient program code.
|

It can be both. There's "feature bloat" and also just
plain bloat. At 32 MB for the Foxit installer, I'm guessing
that's probably about 70 MB for the program. The latest
Adobe Reader is more like 50/100. PDF-XChange is about
8 or 16 for the download, depending on which version
you get. The basic program is a 14 MB program
folder. That's a lot of difference for similar functionality.

Personally I get suspicious of bloat because it indicates
1) sloppiness and 2) wrappers. Some software just wraps
other software and libraries. In other words, the authors
don't really know much about the functionality in their
software. A typical sign of wrappers is bigger program size.
 
I use Foxit Reader 2.3 on XP.

It never locks up or fails to display a PDF document.
The only changes to the Reader is I went to their site and downloaded more
recent addons for viewing jpegs etc.

I wouldn't mind taking a look at a sample of a PDF that locks up for you, if
you could upload it somewhere.
Click to expand...

It would be hard to say anymore which PDFs caused a lockup because I
removed Foxit months ago after getting sick of it hanging up. I went
back to Adobe reader 6.0 which was the last one to run in W98. Adobe
constantly nags me that it may not be able to read this PDF and to
upgrade, but it vierws them ok.

I do recall that Foxit would lockup more on large PDF files with many
graphics. To clearify what happens: I'd click on a PDF file, Foxit
would appear to begin loading, but I'd never see the file. Seeing that
it did not load, I often clicked on that PDF file again. Using an
aftermarket program for Win98, called Process Viewer, I would find Foxit
loaded in memory (or whereever it's running), and for each time I
clicked on that file, there would end up being multiple instances of
Foxit loaded. Process Viewer can stop any process or program from
running, so I would have to stop each instance of Foxit one by one.
Once I did that. no PDF would load until I rebooted. And for some
reason it seems that Foxit almost self destructed, and began doing that
more and more often.

Since many PDF files are large these days, this was happening far too
often, so I finally just removed Foxit and went back to Adobe reader,
which despite it's nags and slowness, did not cause this problem.

I just setup the latest version of PDF-Exchange. The 8 meg download
(portable version). First of all, it DOES work fine on Win98. (I like
that). I did open several large files and they work fine. I did change
the settings to disable JavaScript and remove the web links immediately.
PDF Exchange seems to load slower than Foxit, more like Adobe in this
regard, but but I'm using a slower computer, and I'd rather it load slow
than lockup.

I just installed PDF-Exchange, so aside from slower loading and having
to remove the JS and weblinks, I have nothing bad to say about it (not
yet anyhow). The only thing I do with PDF files is to view them. I
have never seen a need to edit them. so the simpler the better..... I
do see PDF-Exchange has editing capabilities and even drawing, and other
stuff, but I dont see where I'll ever need those. Just being able to
view a PDF file without lockups, or nags, makes me prefer it over the
alternatives.

I should mention that most of the PDF files I view are manuals, such as
"How to rebuild a carburetor on an old farm tractor". These often
include a lot of drawings and pictures, and can be large in size. But
that is not where it ends. Many events often have a PDF file showing
their schedule these days. For example, a fair or festival, or even
some of the tv stations now offer a PDF download of their schedule.
Those used to be small, and mostly text, but I've recently noticed that
some of them are getting large and graphic filled too.

The one thing I still do not understand, is WHY do they put Java Script
into PDF files? What is the purpose?
 
to be able to edit fields.

It did require a few settings changes, like disabling
javascript and removing "Search Providers". Providing
online search links in a PDF editor/viewer is a good example
of someone who's already started sliding down the
slippery slope of bloat. As is "Open from URL". I'd be
more comfortable if the program had no online
functionality at all. Hopefully they'll have the sense
not to slide further. :)
Click to expand...

For those of you who have tried PDF-Exchange, can you find the "SET AS
DEFAULT PDF PROGRAM". I sure cant find it. Maybe it's because I have
the portable version???? I'm tired of Adobe loading all the time when I
click on a PDF.
 
That sounds like you needed to update the jpeg add-on files.
The old ones probably did not work well with large graphics.
 
I've uploaded my copy of Foxit 2.3 that I use, if anyone wants to play
around with it.
Just extract the files to an empty folder and run the application. I've
included a Registry file that sets up the toolbar and preferences the way I
have mine, but you don't need it to run Foxit Reader.
It's about a 6MB download. When you go to Filepost, look for the grey button
that says "slow download". That's the free one.
To uninstall, just delete the folder and then go to the Registry and delete
the entries (should only be two of them). But you can leave the Registry
alone and it won't cause any problems.

http://filepost.com/files/598dmm65/Foxit_Reader_2.3_Build_2923.rar/
 
| For those of you who have tried PDF-Exchange, can you find the "SET AS
| DEFAULT PDF PROGRAM". I sure cant find it. Maybe it's because I have
| the portable version???? I'm tired of Adobe loading all the time when I
| click on a PDF.
|

I don't know, but it's easy enough to change:

Control Panel -> Folder Options -> File Types

Or if you've added Open with... for all files in
right-click you can change it that way by picking
PDF-Exchange and checking the box to "always
use this program".
 
In message <[email protected]>,
On my XP computer, I installed version 5.x It's now gone the sazme I have 5.4.3.0920.
direction as Adobe. It's loaded with bloat, continuously opens my
browser (which that computer is not connected to the internet), has a
lot of advertising when the start page opens, amd contains a toolbar to
Click to expand...

Newer opens my browser, opens (3 or 4 seconds) to a plain grey screen,
no (that I can see) Ask toolbar ...
Ask.com, which attempted to change my browser homepage to Ask.com.
Click to expand...

.... and didn't AFAICR do that. But it might have had an install _option_
(on by default) to do that: since a lot of freeware has that sort of
thing these days, I always use custom install anyway; it's regrettable
that they do, but I understand why (basically too many people just stick
with the free version, and the development has to be paid for somehow).
And 5.x is not the latest version. The latest is 6.x (I think it's
6.1). That file is close to 32 megs. In other words, they have
abandoned the fast and simple, and gone the same way as Adobe.
Click to expand...

Well, they've certainly gone big - though I suspect Adobe are still way
"ahead" of (bigger than) them, with the current versions of both. (I
have Adobe 9.0.0, though rarely use it.)
[]
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

# 10^-12 boos = 1 picoboo # 2*10^3 mockingbirds = 2 kilo mockingbird
# 10^21 piccolos = 1 gigolo # 10^12 microphones = 1 megaphone
# 10**9 questions = 1 gigawhat
 
In message <[email protected]>,
It would be hard to say anymore which PDFs caused a lockup because I
removed Foxit months ago after getting sick of it hanging up. I went
back to Adobe reader 6.0 which was the last one to run in W98. Adobe
constantly nags me that it may not be able to read this PDF and to
upgrade, but it vierws them ok.
Click to expand...

What form do the nags take? If they're a fairly conventional window, I
recommend ClickOff. (Not sure if that runs under '98, though. Hang on,
I'll check ... http://www.johanneshuebner.com/en/clickoff.shtml says
"Windows 95 and higher".
[]
yet anyhow). The only thing I do with PDF files is to view them. I
have never seen a need to edit them. so the simpler the better..... I
do see PDF-Exchange has editing capabilities and even drawing, and other
stuff, but I dont see where I'll ever need those. Just being able to
view a PDF file without lockups, or nags, makes me prefer it over the
alternatives.
Click to expand...

Here in UK, several government forms, for example, are available as PDF
downloads; the idea is you download them and print them off, and then
fill them in with a pen. I like to do so on the computer - not only is
that neater (my writing isn't great), but it means I can also store a
copy of what I've sent off without scanning it. I use Foxit PDF Editor
2.0; the copyright says 2007, so it's older than the version of Foxit
(2012) I have - I don't know if they still do a free one. (The free one
puts a small mark in the top right of pages I edit, but no government
department or similar has objected so far.) (There are probably other
free PDF editors that don't do that, but since that one does what I want
- I don't do it often - I'll probably stay with it.)
[]
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

# 10^-12 boos = 1 picoboo # 2*10^3 mockingbirds = 2 kilo mockingbird
# 10^21 piccolos = 1 gigolo # 10^12 microphones = 1 megaphone
# 10**9 questions = 1 gigawhat
 
In message <[email protected]>, Ken Springer
I've been sitting here wondering, just what is the definition of bloat,
and do all people think bloat is the same thing. A trip to Wikipedia,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_bloat, confirms that it can mean
different things to different people. I'm thinking your definition is
the one where features are added that you have no use for. But there
Click to expand...

I think that's the current most widely-used definition.
will be others who want those features. That type of bloat is a given,
I think, as computers and software evolve into more powerful products.
There's no way to avoid that.
Click to expand...

Agreed (though more use of modular code - where you could select which
bits you want, e. g. at install time - would help; however, including
that functionality is extra effort, and with the price of storage [and
memory, and processor power] these days, there's little [not no, if they
have any pride!] incentive to do it that way these days).
To me, bloat would be more and more inefficient program code.
Click to expand...

I think that's a lost battle, for all but the smallest functions: not
only do feature-packed "compilers" (or "graphic program construction
aids" or whatever the current phrase is) make it _easier_ (and, probably
thus, quicker) to produce code, but also the general complexity of much
of the computing environment means that they're close to being
necessary. Like you, I mourn the disappearance of efficient code, and
still admire small code when I see it: the installer for IrfanView is
still only slightly bigger than a floppy for example! (My favourite -
though I think it dates from '95 or earlier - is a flames simulator,
that still works up to XP [though I think not 7], that is 453 bytes.
Yes, bytes!)
[]
I found both readers in a search for a free PDF printer driver so I
could create PDF files using the print routine, which is standard in OS
X.
Click to expand...
I find pdf995 does it for me; OK, their mini-browser pops up, but
doesn't get anything as my firewall has a rule for it, and that doesn't
stop it working. My employer use it too (I presume they've got the paid
version, as it doesn't show ad.s - the free one probably isn't for
commercial use anyway, many such aren't), and it works fine there too.
(Plenty of pdf "printers" exist though - it gets discussed here from
time to time. Many of them use ghostscript, which sometimes has to be
fetched and installed separately - pdf995 certainly makes you get
something extra before it'll work [possibly install, I can't remember],
though I think they don't tell you that it's ghostscript.)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

# 10^-12 boos = 1 picoboo # 2*10^3 mockingbirds = 2 kilo mockingbird
# 10^21 piccolos = 1 gigolo # 10^12 microphones = 1 megaphone
# 10**9 questions = 1 gigawhat
 
In message <[email protected]>, Ken Springer
I've been sitting here wondering, just what is the definition of bloat,
and do all people think bloat is the same thing. A trip to Wikipedia,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_bloat, confirms that it can mean
different things to different people. I'm thinking your definition is
the one where features are added that you have no use for. But there
Click to expand...

I think that's the current most widely-used definition.
will be others who want those features. That type of bloat is a given,
I think, as computers and software evolve into more powerful products.
There's no way to avoid that.
Click to expand...

Agreed (though more use of modular code - where you could select which
bits you want, e. g. at install time - would help; however, including
that functionality is extra effort, and with the price of storage [and
memory, and processor power] these days, there's little [not no, if they
have any pride!] incentive to do it that way these days).
To me, bloat would be more and more inefficient program code.
Click to expand...

I think that's a lost battle, for all but the smallest functions: not
only do feature-packed "compilers" (or "graphic program construction
aids" or whatever the current phrase is) make it _easier_ (and, probably
thus, quicker) to produce code, but also the general complexity of much
of the computing environment means that they're close to being
necessary. Like you, I mourn the disappearance of efficient code, and
still admire small code when I see it: the installer for IrfanView is
still only slightly bigger than a floppy for example! (My favourite -
though I think it dates from '95 or earlier - is a flames simulator,
that still works up to XP [though I think not 7], that is 453 bytes.
Yes, bytes!)
[]
I found both readers in a search for a free PDF printer driver so I
could create PDF files using the print routine, which is standard in OS
X.
Click to expand...
I find pdf995 does it for me; OK, their mini-browser pops up, but
doesn't get anything as my firewall has a rule for it, and that doesn't
stop it working. My employer use it too (I presume they've got the paid
version, as it doesn't show ad.s - the free one probably isn't for
commercial use anyway, many such aren't), and it works fine there too.
(Plenty of pdf "printers" exist though - it gets discussed here from
time to time. Many of them use ghostscript, which sometimes has to be
fetched and installed separately - pdf995 certainly makes you get
something extra before it'll work [possibly install, I can't remember],
though I think they don't tell you that it's ghostscript.)
Click to expand...

I've found one potential issue with the Nitro3 PDF reader's printer
driver. It may have a problem properly kerning fonts. But I've only
printed a select section of Windows 7 help files, nothing else. So the
problem could be buried in those help files.


--
Ken
Mac OS X 10.8.5
Firefox 25.0
Thunderbird 24.3.0
"My brain is like lightning, a quick flash
and it's gone!"
 
Back
Top