Free Adobe Reader 8

Discussion in 'Computer Security' started by Code name 47, Apr 12, 2007.

  1. Code name 47

    Code name 47 Guest

    Code name 47, Apr 12, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Code name 47

    Notan Guest

    Notan, Apr 12, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Code name 47

    Vanguard Guest

    "Code name 47" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > Compatible for both windows XP and Vista
    >
    > For Download and features...
    >
    > <snipURL>
    >



    No one needs to get your infected copy. They can get it from the
    source: Abobe.
    Vanguard, Apr 13, 2007
    #3
  4. Code name 47

    Ron Lopshire Guest

    Ron Lopshire, Apr 13, 2007
    #4
  5. In article <>, Code name 47 <> wrote:

    > Compatible for both windows XP and Vista
    >
    > For Download and features...
    >
    > http://www.freewebs.com/xptip/adobe_8.htm
    >


    did u have to modify your keylogger to get it to work w/ vista in this dl???

    or did u use the same keylogger for both vers???



    xaogon
    Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer, Apr 13, 2007
    #5
  6. From: "Ron Lopshire" <>

    |
    | Or even better still ...
    |
    | http://www.foxitsoftware.com/pdf/rd_intro.php
    |
    | Ron ;)

    I am very happy with with Adobe Rader albeit some consider it "bloated" compared to FoxIt
    and many have turned to this alternative.

    As an alternative to Adobe Acrobat I have started using the GNU PDF Creator software.

    BTW: I sent you email but I received errors and I am pretty sure you didn't receive it.
    Please drop me an email.

    --
    Dave
    http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html
    http://www.ik-cs.com/got-a-virus.htm
    David H. Lipman, Apr 13, 2007
    #6
  7. David H. Lipman, Apr 13, 2007
    #7
  8. Code name 47

    Ron Lopshire Guest

    David H. Lipman wrote:
    > From: "Ron Lopshire" <>
    >
    > |
    > | Or even better still ...
    > |
    > | http://www.foxitsoftware.com/pdf/rd_intro.php
    > |
    > | Ron ;)
    >
    > I am very happy with with Adobe Rader albeit some consider it "bloated" compared to FoxIt
    > and many have turned to this alternative.
    >
    > As an alternative to Adobe Acrobat I have started using the GNU PDF Creator software.
    >
    > BTW: I sent you email but I received errors and I am pretty sure you didn't receive it.
    > Please drop me an email.


    I sent you an email. Anything sent to /notron/ gets dumped, I get
    everything else.

    I don't create PDFs, and only use them for printing when absolutely
    forced. I find the documents themselves to be one of the most abused,
    along with Flashcrap, formats on the internet. Here is a perfect example
    which I posted in the GRC newsgroups in March.

    My wife feeds her dogs a 5.5 oz can of this every morning.
    http://preview.tinyurl.com/36s7db

    Menu Foods Recall Information
    http://www.menufoods.com/recall/

    Recalled Dog Product Information
    http://www.menufoods.com/recall/product_dog.html

    P&G Pet Care Announces Voluntary Participation in Menu Foods’ Nationwide
    U.S. and Canadian Recall of Specific Canned and Small Foil Pouch ‘Wet’
    Cat and Dog Foods
    http://us.eukanuba.com/eukanuba/global/EukanubaNews.htm

    Recall List
    http://preview.tinyurl.com/yt3vt7

    Product Codes - PDF
    http://preview.tinyurl.com/365t6j

    Now what the heck does all of this have to do with the
    technology-related charter of the GRC NGs? It is this:

    Would someone please explain to me why the information
    contained in the above PDF warrants a 1.5 MB document?

    The merger of Adobe and Macromedia was a marriage made in Heaven. Or
    Hell. ISTM that many, if not most, of the people using their products
    are idiots. Just my 0.02.

    Ron :)
    Ron Lopshire, Apr 14, 2007
    #8
  9. Ron Lopshire <> (07-04-14 14:13:56):

    > I don't create PDFs, and only use them for printing when absolutely
    > forced. I find the documents themselves to be one of the most abused,
    > along with Flashcrap, formats on the internet. Here is a perfect
    > example which I posted in the GRC newsgroups in March.
    >
    > [...]


    PDF is a `portable document format'. It makes static paged documents
    look the same everywhere without the need to store them as a set of
    pictures. It was never intended to be an online format for presenting
    web content to the user.


    > Would someone please explain to me why the information
    > contained in the above PDF warrants a 1.5 MB document?


    Nothing. This is like receiving pictures as Powerpoint files. PDF is
    just misused for something, which it hasn't been made for. That's not
    PDF's fault, it's the user's.


    > The merger of Adobe and Macromedia was a marriage made in Heaven. Or
    > Hell. ISTM that many, if not most, of the people using their products
    > are idiots. Just my 0.02.


    Then 95% of all computer users are idiots. Besides PostScript, PDF is a
    widely used format for paged presentations, especially in science.


    Regards,
    Ertugrul Söylemez.


    --
    From the fact that this CGI program has been written in Haskell, it
    follows naturally that this CGI program is perfectly secure.
    Ertugrul Soeylemez, Apr 14, 2007
    #9
  10. Code name 47

    Ron Lopshire Guest

    Ertugrul Soeylemez wrote:

    > Ron Lopshire <> (07-04-14 14:13:56):
    >
    >>I don't create PDFs, and only use them for printing when absolutely
    >>forced. I find the documents themselves to be one of the most abused,
    >>along with Flashcrap, formats on the internet. Here is a perfect
    >>example which I posted in the GRC newsgroups in March.

    >
    > PDF is a `portable document format'. It makes static paged documents
    > look the same everywhere without the need to store them as a set of
    > pictures. It was never intended to be an online format for presenting
    > web content to the user.


    Except that PDFs only print efficiently on Postscript printers. Gee, do
    you think that has anything to do with both being proprietary (at least
    to start) technologies of Adobe. [g]

    >> Would someone please explain to me why the information
    >> contained in the above PDF warrants a 1.5 MB document?

    >
    > Nothing. This is like receiving pictures as Powerpoint files. PDF is
    > just misused for something, which it hasn't been made for. That's not
    > PDF's fault, it's the user's.


    Of course it is. Ultimately. But whose fault is that really? It all
    comes down to Adobe's BS marketing over the years.

    "The easiest, fastest way to publish anything on the web."

    Give me a break. Morons misuse the PDF format because that is the way
    Adobe wants it.

    >>The merger of Adobe and Macromedia was a marriage made in Heaven. Or
    >>Hell. ISTM that many, if not most, of the people using their products
    >>are idiots. Just my 0.02.

    >
    > Then 95% of all computer users are idiots. Besides PostScript, PDF is a


    Of course they are. No argument here. And because of these idiots, I am
    forced to used PDF. But Adobe can stick PostScript where the Sun doesn't
    shine. I threw my last PostScript printer in the trash 10 years ago.

    > widely used format for paged presentations, especially in science.


    As I a Ph.D. Analytical Chemist, I know that all too well. Some of the
    biggest idiots in the world are scientists. Or pseudo-scientists.

    http://junkscience.com/

    Many of the scientists that I have known over the years should not be
    allowed to touch a computer. [g]

    Thanks for playing. PDF still sucks.

    http://cavlec.yarinareth.net/archives/2002/10/24/why-pdf-sucks/

    http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20030714.html

    I am being somewhat tongue-in-cheek here, Ertugrul. That said, I don't
    see anything wrong with pointing out the insanities of the world. Still,
    nothing will change, of course, because the assholes in marketing won't
    allow it. [vbg]

    Ron :)
    Ron Lopshire, Apr 14, 2007
    #10
  11. Code name 47

    Vanguard Guest

    "David H. Lipman" <DLipman~nospam~@Verizon.Net> wrote in message
    news:pHSTh.79$jR5.26@trnddc08...
    > From: "Code name 47" <>
    >
    > |
    > | Compatible for both windows XP and Vista
    > |
    >
    > You have been spamming you web site in many news groups now.
    >
    > Please stop.



    Oh c'mon. You really think this Pakistani spammer is going to stop and
    play nice?
    Vanguard, Apr 14, 2007
    #11
  12. Code name 47

    Leythos Guest

    On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 16:50:45 +0000, Ron Lopshire wrote:
    >
    > Except that PDFs only print efficiently on Postscript printers.


    I differ with that statement - we use PCL5 and PCL5e printers with
    printing PDF all the time and never have issues.

    With todays printers (in the last 10 years) PDF's print efficiently on any
    of them, provided the driver isn't crappy (read Brother).


    --
    Leythos
    (remove 999 for proper email address)
    Leythos, Apr 14, 2007
    #12
  13. David H. Lipman, Apr 14, 2007
    #13
  14. Code name 47

    Ron Lopshire Guest

    Leythos wrote:

    > On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 16:50:45 +0000, Ron Lopshire wrote:
    >
    >>Except that PDFs only print efficiently on Postscript printers.

    >
    > I differ with that statement - we use PCL5 and PCL5e printers with
    > printing PDF all the time and never have issues.
    >
    > With todays printers (in the last 10 years) PDF's print efficiently on any
    > of them, provided the driver isn't crappy (read Brother).


    I buy and use a lot of re-furbished HP LaserJets. And you are right,
    Leythos, they are and have been getting better. Much better. But if I
    take a normal image (10 to 100 KB, JPEG), printing the image in a PDF is
    much, much slower than printing the same image in any other format such
    as all of the MS Office apps.

    My point about PDFs is that the format is abused only slightly less than
    the Flash format. The use of PDF is warranted in many cases, but putting
    a 20 KB JPEG inside of a 1.5 MB PDF, and then forcing me to download it
    is ridiculous. I didn't switch from dial-up to broadband in order to
    promote such senselessness. [bg]

    My first experience with PDFs was with IRS documents on Kyocera LaserJet
    (6 ppm). If I wanted to file my taxes by April 15, I had to start
    printing the forms in February. LOL.

    OMG, today is April 15th. Damn. [g]

    Ron :)
    Ron Lopshire, Apr 15, 2007
    #14
  15. Code name 47

    Rick Merrill Guest

    Notan wrote:
    ....
    > Or you can do what everyone else in the world has done, and download
    > it directly from Adobe:
    >
    > http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/readstep2.html
    >


    your pointer was the only one that worked - how'd you know about it?

    By the bye, loading Adobe Reader 8.0 clobbered SonicWall VPN world
    client - wtf?
    Rick Merrill, Apr 16, 2007
    #15
  16. Ron Lopshire <> (07-04-14 16:50:45):

    > Except that PDFs only print efficiently on Postscript printers. Gee,
    > do you think that has anything to do with both being proprietary (at
    > least to start) technologies of Adobe. [g]


    I cannot confirm that first statement. About the second, many of the
    formats we use are/were proprietary. To name just a few: JPEG, MPEG,
    ZIP. Are those necessarily bad? You have to use neither Adobe
    products, nor products from the Fraunhofer Institut.

    Why is it that way? It's because the specifications of those formats
    are open. Some are patented, but we still use them, because they fit a
    particular purpose well, and there are tools freely available.

    You will agree that PS/PDF documents, if created properly, have
    excellent qualtity. That's why most scientific books and articles are
    originally written in LaTeX and then published as PS and/or PDF.


    > > > Would someone please explain to me why the information
    > > > contained in the above PDF warrants a 1.5 MB document?

    > >
    > > Nothing. This is like receiving pictures as Powerpoint files. PDF
    > > is just misused for something, which it hasn't been made for.
    > > That's not PDF's fault, it's the user's.

    >
    > Of course it is. Ultimately. But whose fault is that really? It all
    > comes down to Adobe's BS marketing over the years.
    >
    > "The easiest, fastest way to publish anything on the web."
    >
    > Give me a break. Morons misuse the PDF format because that is the way
    > Adobe wants it.


    Yes. There is nothing we could do about it. Microsoft does that (Word,
    Excel, Powerpoint), Adobe does that (PDF and Flash), Sun does that
    (Java), Google does that ("to google"), every major corporation does
    that.


    > > Then 95% of all computer users are idiots. Besides PostScript, PDF
    > > is a

    >
    > Of course they are. No argument here. And because of these idiots, I
    > am forced to used PDF. But Adobe can stick PostScript where the Sun
    > doesn't shine. I threw my last PostScript printer in the trash 10
    > years ago.


    You're probably forced to use PDF, but nobody forces you to use Adobe
    products. And if you really have a problem with Adobe's formats, feel
    free to convert them to whatever you like. You'll lose some quality,
    but who cares? Not supporting PDF is much more important! ;)


    > I am being somewhat tongue-in-cheek here, Ertugrul. That said, I don't
    > see anything wrong with pointing out the insanities of the
    > world. Still, nothing will change, of course, because the assholes in
    > marketing won't allow it. [vbg]


    Sad, but true. In fact, in everyday life we even feed these insanities.
    But that's okay. We're just human. ;)


    Regards,
    Ertugrul Söylemez.


    --
    From the fact that this CGI program has been written in Haskell, it
    follows naturally that this CGI program is perfectly secure.
    Ertugrul Soeylemez, Apr 17, 2007
    #16
  17. Code name 47

    Sebastian G Guest

    Ertugrul Soeylemez wrote:

    > About the second, many of the formats we use are/were proprietary. To
    > name just a few: JPEG, MPEG, ZIP.



    JPEG and MPEG have never been proprietary. The proprietary times of ZIP are
    long gone by.

    > Why is it that way? It's because the specifications of those formats are
    > open.



    Ehm... that's exactly why they're not proprietary.

    > Some are patented, but we still use them, because they fit a
    > particular purpose well, and there are tools freely available.



    In Europe we use them because their patents are invalid here.

    > You will agree that PS/PDF documents, if created properly, have excellent
    > qualtity. That's why most scientific books and articles are originally
    > written in LaTeX and then published as PS and/or PDF.



    I will agree that, by design, PDF has the need to maintain some
    compatibility to PS. And even that already is a headache.

    > Yes. There is nothing we could do about it.



    Ehm... we could sue them, since they're partitially responsible for
    incidents arising from advertising such misbehaviour.
    Sebastian G, Apr 17, 2007
    #17
  18. Sebastian G <> (07-04-17 17:42:24):

    > > About the second, many of the formats we use are/were proprietary.
    > > To name just a few: JPEG, MPEG, ZIP.

    >
    > JPEG and MPEG have never been proprietary. The proprietary times of
    > ZIP are long gone by.
    >
    > > Why is it that way? It's because the specifications of those
    > > formats are open.

    >
    > Ehm... that's exactly why they're not proprietary.


    Then we have differing definitions of `proprietary'. It can mean
    `secret' as well as `owned by someone'. I've been using it to stand for
    the latter.


    > > Some are patented, but we still use them, because they fit a
    > > particular purpose well, and there are tools freely available.

    >
    > In Europe we use them because their patents are invalid here.


    Another good point.


    > > You will agree that PS/PDF documents, if created properly, have
    > > excellent qualtity. That's why most scientific books and articles
    > > are originally written in LaTeX and then published as PS and/or PDF.

    >
    > I will agree that, by design, PDF has the need to maintain some
    > compatibility to PS. And even that already is a headache.


    To be honest, I don't like PS much. But however, my documents are as
    compatible as LaTeX generates them. I don't care.


    > > Yes. There is nothing we could do about it.

    >
    > Ehm... we could sue them, since they're partitially responsible for
    > incidents arising from advertising such misbehaviour.


    The problem is that we won't be successful doing that, unless we're a
    large corporation. Even then, it would take years and success would be
    questionable. Although I don't like the marketing policies of current
    monopolists and other big entities, IMO there is nothing wrong with
    advertising (or otherwise making attractive) your product for as many
    uses as possible.


    Regards,
    Ertugrul Söylemez.


    --
    From the fact that this CGI program has been written in Haskell, it
    follows naturally that this CGI program is perfectly secure.
    Ertugrul Soeylemez, Apr 20, 2007
    #18
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. LAH

    Adobe Acrobat & Adobe Reader

    LAH, Apr 11, 2005, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    1,131
    pcbutts1
    Apr 11, 2005
  2. Replies:
    5
    Views:
    600
    Colin D
    Dec 16, 2005
  3. Mike
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    633
  4. Code name 47

    Free Adobe Reader 8

    Code name 47, Apr 12, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    1,423
    Paul J Gans
    Apr 17, 2007
  5. akiwi
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    705
    Gordon
    Mar 28, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page