PDF to DOC?

Discussion in 'Computer Information' started by Robert Baer, Feb 20, 2013.

  1. Robert Baer

    Robert Baer Guest

    I used the baby bird (GooGull) for converters / software.
    NONE WORK.
    Class #1: download zip/exe and crashes as DLL is missing.
    Class #2: download zip/exe and crashes as NOT a 32-bit app.
    Class #3: download, during setup it complains about IE must be 6 or
    better - WTF about pissy IE? In any case IE6 download does not work.
    Class #4A: submit file for conversion, result is pure garbage in Nerd.
    Class #4B: submit file for conversion, takes forever (gave up after
    15 MINUTES!).

    Dammit all to hell, i need to edit a PDF!!
    My Acrobat 4 reader/writer complains on trying to edit a line of text
    "Touchup could not parse this page".

    _WORKABLE_ ideas anyone?
    Robert Baer, Feb 20, 2013
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Robert Baer

    VanguardLH Guest

    Robert Baer wrote:

    > i need to edit a PDF!! My Acrobat 4 reader/writer complains on trying
    > to edit a line of text "Touchup could not parse this page".


    You could try http://www.pdftoword.com/. Then you don't have to install
    any software. However, they may also fail since it looks like your .pdf
    is corrupted.
    VanguardLH, Feb 20, 2013
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Robert Baer

    Robert Baer Guest

    VanguardLH wrote:
    > Robert Baer wrote:
    >
    >> i need to edit a PDF!! My Acrobat 4 reader/writer complains on trying
    >> to edit a line of text "Touchup could not parse this page".

    >
    > You could try http://www.pdftoword.com/. Then you don't have to install
    > any software. However, they may also fail since it looks like your .pdf
    > is corrupted.

    I do not remember if i tried that one or not; if it is in the first
    10 "hits" at the Baby Bird (GooGull), then i did.
    Every online "converter" where you upload your PDF and they either
    send the DOC to your e-mail or have it for download sent pure garbage
    back - some that was crudely formatted the same way but almost blank;
    all had ranDumb characters.
    Adobe Acrobat 4.0, 6.0 and 7.0 ALL view the file perfectly OK and
    print it OK as well - so it cannot be corrupted.
    I need to revise the numbers in it.
    Robert Baer, Feb 21, 2013
    #3
  4. Robert Baer

    VanguardLH Guest

    Robert Baer wrote:

    > VanguardLH wrote:
    >
    >> Robert Baer wrote:
    >>
    >>> i need to edit a PDF!! My Acrobat 4 reader/writer complains on trying
    >>> to edit a line of text "Touchup could not parse this page".

    >>
    >> You could try http://www.pdftoword.com/. Then you don't have to install
    >> any software. However, they may also fail since it looks like your .pdf
    >> is corrupted.

    >
    > I do not remember if i tried that one or not; if it is in the first
    > 10 "hits" at the Baby Bird (GooGull), then i did. Every online
    > "converter" where you upload your PDF and they either send the DOC to
    > your e-mail or have it for download sent pure garbage back - some
    > that was crudely formatted the same way but almost blank; all had
    > ranDumb characters.


    So you'll never know (and neither will we) if the Nitro PDF to Doc
    converter will work because you don't know if you tried it and won't try
    it.

    > Adobe Acrobat 4.0, 6.0 and 7.0 ALL view the file perfectly OK and
    > print it OK as well - so it cannot be corrupted.
    > I need to revise the numbers in it.


    You said you got a "Touchup could not parse this page" error when you
    attempted to modify the .pdf document. It may render as it is currently
    but if any change causes corruption then something about its structure
    doesn't jive with what Acrobat expects (and, to me, that means
    corruption despite the current doc will view okay).
    VanguardLH, Feb 21, 2013
    #4
  5. Robert Baer

    Robert Baer Guest

    VanguardLH wrote:
    > Robert Baer wrote:
    >
    >> VanguardLH wrote:
    >>
    >>> Robert Baer wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> i need to edit a PDF!! My Acrobat 4 reader/writer complains on trying
    >>>> to edit a line of text "Touchup could not parse this page".
    >>>
    >>> You could try http://www.pdftoword.com/. Then you don't have to install
    >>> any software. However, they may also fail since it looks like your .pdf
    >>> is corrupted.

    >>
    >> I do not remember if i tried that one or not; if it is in the first
    >> 10 "hits" at the Baby Bird (GooGull), then i did. Every online
    >> "converter" where you upload your PDF and they either send the DOC to
    >> your e-mail or have it for download sent pure garbage back - some
    >> that was crudely formatted the same way but almost blank; all had
    >> ranDumb characters.

    >
    > So you'll never know (and neither will we) if the Nitro PDF to Doc
    > converter will work because you don't know if you tried it and won't try
    > it.
    >
    >> Adobe Acrobat 4.0, 6.0 and 7.0 ALL view the file perfectly OK and
    >> print it OK as well - so it cannot be corrupted.
    >> I need to revise the numbers in it.

    >
    > You said you got a "Touchup could not parse this page" error when you
    > attempted to modify the .pdf document. It may render as it is currently
    > but if any change causes corruption then something about its structure
    > doesn't jive with what Acrobat expects (and, to me, that means
    > corruption despite the current doc will view okay).

    I did try Nitro and that was the worst in giving garbage characters
    and in random places all over each page; did not recognize that URL as
    being the Nitro "converter".
    The document i am trying to alter started as an IRS "fillable" PDF
    which i filled out and either saved or savedAS (seems to make a difference).
    I do know the result has a different name but that does not prove i
    used savedAS for the new name; i had carefully ZIPped the originals
    before use.
    Robert Baer, Feb 21, 2013
    #5
  6. Robert Baer

    VanguardLH Guest

    Robert Baer wrote:

    > VanguardLH wrote:
    >
    >> Robert Baer wrote:
    >>
    >>> VanguardLH wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Robert Baer wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> i need to edit a PDF!! My Acrobat 4 reader/writer complains on
    >>>>> trying to edit a line of text "Touchup could not parse this
    >>>>> page".
    >>>>
    >>>> You could try http://www.pdftoword.com/.
    >>>
    >>> I do not remember if i tried that one or not ...

    >>
    >> So you'll never know (and neither will we) if the Nitro PDF to Doc
    >> converter will work ...

    >
    > I did try Nitro and that was the worst in giving garbage characters
    > and in random places all over each page ...
    > The document i am trying to alter started as an IRS "fillable" PDF ...


    Some of the IRS docs in PDF use Javascript in them (to validate input
    from the user is the type expected in the field. I've never bothered
    with scripted PDFs before so I don't know if trying to edit one would
    cause the problem you describe.

    Can you open the PDF, print it using a PDF printer (i.e., PDFcreator,
    BullZip PDF Printer, CutePDF) and then edit that .pdf output file with
    Acrobat? I don't know if Acrobat has a "Print to .pdf" feature (versus
    a Save [As] dialog) but at this point I'd try something other than
    Acrobat to "print [to file]" the contents of the .pdf document.
    VanguardLH, Feb 21, 2013
    #6
  7. Robert Baer

    Robert Baer Guest

    Robert Baer wrote:
    > I used the baby bird (GooGull) for converters / software.
    > NONE WORK.
    > Class #1: download zip/exe and crashes as DLL is missing.
    > Class #2: download zip/exe and crashes as NOT a 32-bit app.
    > Class #3: download, during setup it complains about IE must be 6 or
    > better - WTF about pissy IE? In any case IE6 download does not work.
    > Class #4A: submit file for conversion, result is pure garbage in Nerd.
    > Class #4B: submit file for conversion, takes forever (gave up after 15
    > MINUTES!).
    >
    > Dammit all to hell, i need to edit a PDF!!
    > My Acrobat 4 reader/writer complains on trying to edit a line of text
    > "Touchup could not parse this page".
    >
    > _WORKABLE_ ideas anyone?
    >

    What i have done:
    Used Acrobat 4.0 to load and look at the file, then printed using a
    postscript printer driver,to a file.
    That file looks perfectly OK.
    CorelDraw sees the original PDF and that PS file perfectly OK so the
    file cannot be corrupt.
    Will use CorelDraw for patching the numbers.
    Dunno why i had not thought of using CorelDraw before.
    Thanks.
    Robert Baer, Feb 21, 2013
    #7
  8. Robert Baer

    Robert Baer Guest

    Robert Baer wrote:
    > I used the baby bird (GooGull) for converters / software.
    > NONE WORK.
    > Class #1: download zip/exe and crashes as DLL is missing.
    > Class #2: download zip/exe and crashes as NOT a 32-bit app.
    > Class #3: download, during setup it complains about IE must be 6 or
    > better - WTF about pissy IE? In any case IE6 download does not work.
    > Class #4A: submit file for conversion, result is pure garbage in Nerd.
    > Class #4B: submit file for conversion, takes forever (gave up after 15
    > MINUTES!).
    >
    > Dammit all to hell, i need to edit a PDF!!
    > My Acrobat 4 reader/writer complains on trying to edit a line of text
    > "Touchup could not parse this page".
    >
    > _WORKABLE_ ideas anyone?
    >

    Inkscape does not work: "The procedure entry point freeadrinfo could
    not be located in the dynamic link library WS2_32.dll.".
    Robert Baer, Feb 21, 2013
    #8
  9. Robert Baer

    Paul Guest

    Robert Baer wrote:
    > Robert Baer wrote:
    >> I used the baby bird (GooGull) for converters / software.
    >> NONE WORK.
    >> Class #1: download zip/exe and crashes as DLL is missing.
    >> Class #2: download zip/exe and crashes as NOT a 32-bit app.
    >> Class #3: download, during setup it complains about IE must be 6 or
    >> better - WTF about pissy IE? In any case IE6 download does not work.
    >> Class #4A: submit file for conversion, result is pure garbage in Nerd.
    >> Class #4B: submit file for conversion, takes forever (gave up after 15
    >> MINUTES!).
    >>
    >> Dammit all to hell, i need to edit a PDF!!
    >> My Acrobat 4 reader/writer complains on trying to edit a line of text
    >> "Touchup could not parse this page".
    >>
    >> _WORKABLE_ ideas anyone?
    >>

    > What i have done:
    > Used Acrobat 4.0 to load and look at the file, then printed using a
    > postscript printer driver,to a file.
    > That file looks perfectly OK.
    > CorelDraw sees the original PDF and that PS file perfectly OK so the
    > file cannot be corrupt.
    > Will use CorelDraw for patching the numbers.
    > Dunno why i had not thought of using CorelDraw before.
    > Thanks.
    >
    >


    The (very expensive) version of CorelDraw I bought years ago,
    was their very first to support editing of that type. It turned out,
    the CorelDraw code uses an older version of GDI with a 64K object
    limit. Which promptly resulted in a CorelDraw crash on the very
    first (and last) attempt to edit.

    So good luck with that.

    I use GhostScript on occasion, to work magic on files like
    that. But these tools, when they offer to do "down-revision"
    transformations, they don't really do that. If I were to run
    pstopdf3 on a PDF file, to make another PDF file, I don't
    think the constructs inside are really transformed into
    compatible code or anything.

    *******

    Perhaps you could give a pointer to the original PDF file,
    just for fun. I can then type some crap into it, save it
    (as if I was filling out my taxes), then see what is possible.

    Are you trying to drag this into Microsoft Word ? And if so,
    what part of the original document absolutely must be saved ?
    Just the text ? Formatting and boxes as well ? It's not likely
    to all translate. You would end up with a poor facsimile
    of the original.

    As for IE6, many eons ago, I took a snapshot of some temporary
    directory during an IE6 installation. And that folder of
    stuff, functions now as a stand alone installer. If I need to install
    IE6 on Win2K SP4 for example, I can use that to get the job done.
    Originally, the IE6 installer was a "stub" with no files. But
    by keeping the temp directory from the first install, I can
    redo it (without calling Microsoft) at a later date.

    Not that IE6 is of much usage or anything.

    Paul
    Paul, Feb 21, 2013
    #9
  10. Robert Baer

    Robert Baer Guest

    Paul wrote:
    > Robert Baer wrote:
    >> Robert Baer wrote:
    >>> I used the baby bird (GooGull) for converters / software.
    >>> NONE WORK.
    >>> Class #1: download zip/exe and crashes as DLL is missing.
    >>> Class #2: download zip/exe and crashes as NOT a 32-bit app.
    >>> Class #3: download, during setup it complains about IE must be 6 or
    >>> better - WTF about pissy IE? In any case IE6 download does not work.
    >>> Class #4A: submit file for conversion, result is pure garbage in Nerd.
    >>> Class #4B: submit file for conversion, takes forever (gave up after 15
    >>> MINUTES!).
    >>>
    >>> Dammit all to hell, i need to edit a PDF!!
    >>> My Acrobat 4 reader/writer complains on trying to edit a line of text
    >>> "Touchup could not parse this page".
    >>>
    >>> _WORKABLE_ ideas anyone?
    >>>

    >> What i have done:
    >> Used Acrobat 4.0 to load and look at the file, then printed using a
    >> postscript printer driver,to a file.
    >> That file looks perfectly OK.
    >> CorelDraw sees the original PDF and that PS file perfectly OK so the
    >> file cannot be corrupt.
    >> Will use CorelDraw for patching the numbers.
    >> Dunno why i had not thought of using CorelDraw before.
    >> Thanks.
    >>
    >>

    >
    > The (very expensive) version of CorelDraw I bought years ago,
    > was their very first to support editing of that type. It turned out,
    > the CorelDraw code uses an older version of GDI with a 64K object
    > limit. Which promptly resulted in a CorelDraw crash on the very
    > first (and last) attempt to edit.
    >
    > So good luck with that.

    * What i did was brought in a .PS version, and it shows as a graphic; i
    can overlay anything without fuss.
    I only had to break apart the overlaid pages into separate sheets.

    >
    > I use GhostScript on occasion, to work magic on files like
    > that. But these tools, when they offer to do "down-revision"
    > transformations, they don't really do that. If I were to run
    > pstopdf3 on a PDF file, to make another PDF file, I don't
    > think the constructs inside are really transformed into
    > compatible code or anything.

    * Check; GhostScript was not useful.

    >
    > *******
    >
    > Perhaps you could give a pointer to the original PDF file,
    > just for fun. I can then type some crap into it, save it
    > (as if I was filling out my taxes), then see what is possible.
    >
    > Are you trying to drag this into Microsoft Word ? And if so,
    > what part of the original document absolutely must be saved ?
    > Just the text ? Formatting and boxes as well ? It's not likely
    > to all translate. You would end up with a poor facsimile
    > of the original.

    * I only thought of Word because of the numbers (text).
    What i have is an "original" 1065 PDF made out by a lawyer who knows
    everything and makes no mistakes.
    His mis-allocation of money paid to me, which was actually a return
    of an investment was itemized as EMPLOYMENT INCOME and so i was forced
    to pay income tax on it (pissed me off no end; arguing got me nowhere).
    As a further indication of his ignorance, he explicitly stated that
    FICA filing was not needed.
    Say what? Social Security and Medicare taxes are always due on
    employment income.
    That was a year ago; i was so pissed that i said F* it and paid the tax.
    Now another 1065 pops up, fortunately a loss.
    The 1065 instructions are not exactly clear in some places (so what
    else is new with IRS stuff?), but i found 3 (alternate) ways of filling
    it out for zer0 employment income.
    One way got tossed on further research on short order, and a second
    way did not look overall viable.
    The last one has the added benefit of reduced income to the company.
    Have my tax lady look at it for an amended filing.
    Meanwhile i am going to file a 14157 complaint.

    >
    > As for IE6, many eons ago, I took a snapshot of some temporary
    > directory during an IE6 installation. And that folder of
    > stuff, functions now as a stand alone installer. If I need to install
    > IE6 on Win2K SP4 for example, I can use that to get the job done.
    > Originally, the IE6 installer was a "stub" with no files. But
    > by keeping the temp directory from the first install, I can
    > redo it (without calling Microsoft) at a later date.

    * Cool! Is it possible that (assuming i get those files) i could
    install IE6 - WITHOUT interfering with IE5?
    That way i can test web code on IE5, 6, 7, 6, and 9.

    >
    > Not that IE6 is of much usage or anything.
    >
    > Paul
    Robert Baer, Feb 23, 2013
    #10
  11. Robert Baer

    Paul Guest

    Robert Baer wrote:
    > Paul wrote:


    >>
    >> As for IE6, many eons ago, I took a snapshot of some temporary
    >> directory during an IE6 installation. And that folder of
    >> stuff, functions now as a stand alone installer. If I need to install
    >> IE6 on Win2K SP4 for example, I can use that to get the job done.
    >> Originally, the IE6 installer was a "stub" with no files. But
    >> by keeping the temp directory from the first install, I can
    >> redo it (without calling Microsoft) at a later date.


    > * Cool! Is it possible that (assuming i get those files) i could
    > install IE6 - WITHOUT interfering with IE5?
    > That way i can test web code on IE5, 6, 7, 6, and 9.
    >


    I think there is a different recipe for that.

    Someone figured out a way to run a few versions in parallel.

    http://www.tredosoft.com/Multiple_IE

    I doubt my installer would help, as it likely obliterates
    a previous IE.

    If you are good with virtual machines, you could likely run a
    bunch of those (one IE version per VM). Win2K would be the best
    candidate, with the caveat of a limited set of versions that
    would work. Probably IE6 would be the max in that case.

    Using Preview versions of Windows might extend your test
    capabilities. But at the current time, no OS previews are valid.
    That doesn't entirely spoil the fun. I can still install
    the Windows 7 preview, and it runs (in "not genuine" mode),
    and you can still get a few things done in it. Not a lot
    of fun though. And for the later versions of IE, I doubt
    a standalone installer is available. When I run a Preview copy
    of Windows 7, I like to keep it off the net. I don't expect
    it would run for more than 3 days (72 hours). I haven't tried
    a Windows 8 Preview version lately, to see how it behaves,
    as I have a real honest to goodness $39.95 install running
    instead.

    Paul
    Paul, Feb 23, 2013
    #11
  12. Robert Baer

    VanguardLH Guest

    Robert Baer wrote:

    > Is it possible that (assuming i get those files) i could
    > install IE6 - WITHOUT interfering with IE5?


    Don't recall why after more than a decade afterward but I'm sure you
    don't want to go below version 5.5 for Internet Explorer.

    IE 5.5:
    http://www.oldapps.com/internet_explorer.php?old_internet_explorer=13

    IE 6:
    http://www.oldapps.com/internet_explorer.php?old_internet_explorer=11

    IE 7:
    http://www.oldapps.com/internet_explorer.php?old_internet_explorer=9

    IE 8:
    http://www.oldapps.com/internet_explorer.php?old_internet_explorer=17

    IE9:
    too many to bother in a short time to pick one

    Do your own searches there. I just grabbed some URLs on what looked
    like a good match but didn't investigate if they were a beta, initial,
    full, or other type of installation.

    > That way i can test web code on IE5, 6, 7, 6, and 9.


    I have seen users claim they had the multiple IE libs installed
    concurrenty so they could load different versions of IE; however, the
    exercise was so convoluted with flaky results that I don't recommend it
    to anyone. Instead, some solutions are to use virtual machines in which
    you can have different versions of IE or use a virtualized copy of the
    web browser.

    For a virtual machine, you cannot uninstall the base version of IE from
    Windows. I think IE6 came with Windows XP so you cannot get it down to
    IE5, only at IE6 or higher. Alas, with virtual machines, you are
    legally obligated to purchase another license of Windows, one for each
    virtual machine (XP's license lets you have multiple installs but only
    one can be active at a time wherease Vista, and later, are more
    restrictive). I suppose you could install some Linux variant in the
    virtual machine and then check if WINE would let you run an install of
    IE under that emulated environ.

    There was a product from Altiris (called SVS) that could make apps look
    like they didn't exist. It isolated the apps in their own virtualized
    app environ but not disconnected from the real OS. This was not a
    security solution as is a virtual machine. The apps would run just like
    a regular app on your host so anything a non-SVS app could do on your
    could also be performed by an SVS app when its app layer was enabled.
    If you needed to run another version or load a conflicting program, you
    would disable the app environ for one app and load the environ for the
    conflicting app. That way, you could have multiple versions of the same
    program installed or prevent conflicts between non-compatible apps.
    Alas, Symantec acquired Altiris and the SVS product (free) disappeared
    after a year. Symantec does that with lots of products to quash
    competition under the guise they are going to incorporate the acquired
    code into their own products but which often never happens. There
    might've been other vendors of SVS (software virtualization solution)
    but I only remember Altiris (since I used it until Symantec made it
    disappear).

    Instead of installing the web browsers on your own host, and somewhat
    similar to SVS (virtualized app layering that you can enable/disable to
    make apps appear/disappear from your host), you could run them as
    virtualized apps. These are somewhat like sandboxes but are not
    designed to isolate the app from the OS, devices, and other files or
    software on your host. They are more like application layering where
    everything for an installed app could be exposed or hidden. Spoon.net,
    for example, has canned virtual apps you can run on your host. I think
    you only need to download and install their web browser handler that
    manages the app layering. After that, you can visit their site and
    select which web browser you want to use. These are actually demos of
    their app layering product to lure enterprise-level customers in
    providing a means of doing what Altiris SVS did but they are fully
    functional demos. They have lots of demos of varying types of software,
    including web browser (http://spoon.net/browsers). From a glimpse at
    that web page, it looks like you have to upgrade (pay money) to get
    their app layering "sandbox" that supports the old version of the web
    browsers.

    You could save an image backup of your OS partition, install the base or
    later version of IE for that version of Windows, and then restore from
    the image afterward to get back to what you had before. That's a
    nuisance determined by how long it takes to save an image backup (and
    later do a restore). Some image backup programs, like Easeus ToDo
    Workstation (payware), let you save snapshots. Those take only a couple
    minutes to save and a minute to restore so they are doable to restore
    your computer to a prior state after installing and testing some
    software that you may not want to keep, are trialing, or are unknown and
    possibly suspicious. I suppose this is akin to GoBack's snapshotting
    that let you revert to a prior state in a quick and easy manner.
    VanguardLH, Feb 23, 2013
    #12
  13. Robert Baer

    Robert Baer Guest

    Paul wrote:
    > Robert Baer wrote:
    >> Paul wrote:

    >
    >>>
    >>> As for IE6, many eons ago, I took a snapshot of some temporary
    >>> directory during an IE6 installation. And that folder of
    >>> stuff, functions now as a stand alone installer. If I need to install
    >>> IE6 on Win2K SP4 for example, I can use that to get the job done.
    >>> Originally, the IE6 installer was a "stub" with no files. But
    >>> by keeping the temp directory from the first install, I can
    >>> redo it (without calling Microsoft) at a later date.

    >
    >> * Cool! Is it possible that (assuming i get those files) i could
    >> install IE6 - WITHOUT interfering with IE5?
    >> That way i can test web code on IE5, 6, 7, 6, and 9.
    >>

    >
    > I think there is a different recipe for that.
    >
    > Someone figured out a way to run a few versions in parallel.
    >
    > http://www.tredosoft.com/Multiple_IE
    >
    > I doubt my installer would help, as it likely obliterates
    > a previous IE.
    >
    > If you are good with virtual machines, you could likely run a
    > bunch of those (one IE version per VM). Win2K would be the best
    > candidate, with the caveat of a limited set of versions that
    > would work. Probably IE6 would be the max in that case.
    >
    > Using Preview versions of Windows might extend your test
    > capabilities. But at the current time, no OS previews are valid.
    > That doesn't entirely spoil the fun. I can still install
    > the Windows 7 preview, and it runs (in "not genuine" mode),
    > and you can still get a few things done in it. Not a lot
    > of fun though. And for the later versions of IE, I doubt
    > a standalone installer is available. When I run a Preview copy
    > of Windows 7, I like to keep it off the net. I don't expect
    > it would run for more than 3 days (72 hours). I haven't tried
    > a Windows 8 Preview version lately, to see how it behaves,
    > as I have a real honest to goodness $39.95 install running
    > instead.
    >
    > Paul

    What i did, was make a HD with three partitions: Win2K, Win7, and Win7.
    That Win2K is "upgraded" to IE6 and i have to use a separate HD for IE5.
    The first Win7 has the default IE8 (which has a "compatibility" IE7
    mode) and the second "upgraded" to IE9.
    *
    Nobody will say if a/any given OS running in a VM environment acts
    the same as if directly installed on a HD, and i know so little about
    the use and taming of any VM software that i (so far) am busy ignoring it.
    Robert Baer, Feb 26, 2013
    #13
  14. Robert Baer

    Robert Baer Guest

    VanguardLH wrote:
    > Robert Baer wrote:
    >
    >> Is it possible that (assuming i get those files) i could
    >> install IE6 - WITHOUT interfering with IE5?

    >
    > Don't recall why after more than a decade afterward but I'm sure you
    > don't want to go below version 5.5 for Internet Explorer.
    >
    > IE 5.5:
    > http://www.oldapps.com/internet_explorer.php?old_internet_explorer=13
    >
    > IE 6:
    > http://www.oldapps.com/internet_explorer.php?old_internet_explorer=11

    * Full version they say; size looks reasonable.
    Tanks!!!

    >
    > IE 7:
    > http://www.oldapps.com/internet_explorer.php?old_internet_explorer=9
    >
    > IE 8:
    > http://www.oldapps.com/internet_explorer.php?old_internet_explorer=17
    >
    > IE9:
    > too many to bother in a short time to pick one
    >
    > Do your own searches there. I just grabbed some URLs on what looked
    > like a good match but didn't investigate if they were a beta, initial,
    > full, or other type of installation.
    >
    >> That way i can test web code on IE5, 6, 7, 6, and 9.

    >
    > I have seen users claim they had the multiple IE libs installed
    > concurrenty so they could load different versions of IE; however, the
    > exercise was so convoluted with flaky results that I don't recommend it
    > to anyone. Instead, some solutions are to use virtual machines in which
    > you can have different versions of IE or use a virtualized copy of the
    > web browser.

    * I would not trust present "concurrent" programs further than tossing
    Mt Everest.
    Now, in the 1980's (roughly) things were cruder perhaps but a hell of
    a lot more reliable and controllable.


    >
    > For a virtual machine, you cannot uninstall the base version of IE from
    > Windows. I think IE6 came with Windows XP so you cannot get it down to
    > IE5, only at IE6 or higher. Alas, with virtual machines, you are
    > legally obligated to purchase another license of Windows, one for each
    > virtual machine (XP's license lets you have multiple installs but only
    > one can be active at a time wherease Vista, and later, are more
    > restrictive). I suppose you could install some Linux variant in the
    > virtual machine and then check if WINE would let you run an install of
    > IE under that emulated environ.

    * Presuming that would work, one can easily guarantee the operation of
    the browser would NOT be the same as if installed directly in the
    preferred OS.

    >
    > There was a product from Altiris (called SVS) that could make apps look
    > like they didn't exist. It isolated the apps in their own virtualized
    > app environ but not disconnected from the real OS. This was not a
    > security solution as is a virtual machine. The apps would run just like
    > a regular app on your host so anything a non-SVS app could do on your
    > could also be performed by an SVS app when its app layer was enabled.
    > If you needed to run another version or load a conflicting program, you
    > would disable the app environ for one app and load the environ for the
    > conflicting app. That way, you could have multiple versions of the same
    > program installed or prevent conflicts between non-compatible apps.
    > Alas, Symantec acquired Altiris and the SVS product (free) disappeared
    > after a year. Symantec does that with lots of products to quash
    > competition under the guise they are going to incorporate the acquired
    > code into their own products but which often never happens. There
    > might've been other vendors of SVS (software virtualization solution)
    > but I only remember Altiris (since I used it until Symantec made it
    > disappear).

    * Sounds a bit complicated and contrived; wold not trust the operation
    to be the same.

    >
    > Instead of installing the web browsers on your own host, and somewhat
    > similar to SVS (virtualized app layering that you can enable/disable to
    > make apps appear/disappear from your host), you could run them as
    > virtualized apps. These are somewhat like sandboxes but are not
    > designed to isolate the app from the OS, devices, and other files or
    > software on your host. They are more like application layering where
    > everything for an installed app could be exposed or hidden. Spoon.net,
    > for example, has canned virtual apps you can run on your host. I think
    > you only need to download and install their web browser handler that
    > manages the app layering. After that, you can visit their site and
    > select which web browser you want to use. These are actually demos of
    > their app layering product to lure enterprise-level customers in
    > providing a means of doing what Altiris SVS did but they are fully
    > functional demos. They have lots of demos of varying types of software,
    > including web browser (http://spoon.net/browsers). From a glimpse at
    > that web page, it looks like you have to upgrade (pay money) to get
    > their app layering "sandbox" that supports the old version of the web
    > browsers.
    >
    > You could save an image backup of your OS partition, install the base or
    > later version of IE for that version of Windows, and then restore from
    > the image afterward to get back to what you had before. That's a
    > nuisance determined by how long it takes to save an image backup (and
    > later do a restore). Some image backup programs, like Easeus ToDo
    > Workstation (payware), let you save snapshots. Those take only a couple
    > minutes to save and a minute to restore so they are doable to restore
    > your computer to a prior state after installing and testing some
    > software that you may not want to keep, are trialing, or are unknown and
    > possibly suspicious. I suppose this is akin to GoBack's snapshotting
    > that let you revert to a prior state in a quick and easy manner.

    I think my approach of multiple partitions, each with preferred OS
    and its "native" browser is much more trustworthy.
    Robert Baer, Feb 26, 2013
    #14
  15. Robert Baer

    VanguardLH Guest

    Robert Baer wrote:

    > VanguardLH wrote:
    >
    >> For a virtual machine, ...
    >> ... I suppose you could install some Linux variant in the
    >> virtual machine and then check if WINE would let you run an install of
    >> IE under that emulated environ.

    >
    > * Presuming that would work, one can easily guarantee the operation of
    > the browser would NOT be the same as if installed directly in the
    > preferred OS.


    You would have to ask a Linux newsgroup or forum on the viability of
    running IE inside of WINE running on *NIX. When I'm using non-Windows
    operating systems, they aren't intended for running Windows apps. They
    run OS-native apps. It was a suggestion. As to your claim, it's just a
    guess on your part. You don't know ... yet.

    I'm assuming your statement was about running IE under WINE and not when
    running IE in a VM. In a VM, obviously IE *would* behave the same
    because it *is* running under Windows. The only "guarantee the
    operation would NOT be the same" is that everything runs slower in a VM.
    Hey, the VM is software emulated hardware after all, not real hardware.

    >> There was a product from Altiris (called SVS) that could make apps look
    >> like they didn't exist. It isolated the apps in their own virtualized
    >> app environ but not disconnected from the real OS.

    >
    > * Sounds a bit complicated and contrived; wold not trust the operation
    > to be the same.


    Actually it worked extremely well. It was an enterprise-level program.
    The free SVS server was a reduce functionality version but more than
    sufficient for end users.

    You could install multiple versions of MS Office. During installation
    or later when executed, a version couldn't see anything of another
    version. If you had software that conflicted with each other, you could
    unload the layer for one and load the layer for the other (i.e., keep
    them mutually exclusive) and each ran fine. Security software, like
    anti-virus, dug too deep along with system hooks so they would still be
    present whether app layers were loaded or not ... but then web browsers
    aren't AV program or digging into the OS and instead run at the user
    mode level. Before I heard about spoon.net (forget its original
    domain), I used SVS to have several versions of IE available at once. I
    had other web browsers installed. It was up to me as to which of them
    were visible and which were hidden.

    There were ways of penetrating an application layer but the point of
    this software wasn't to isolate malware. It was to isolate apps. And
    it worked very well, right up to when Symantec made it disappear. No
    more difficult to manage than having to manage multiple VMs. With a VMM
    (VM manager), you picked which VMs to load separately or concurrently.
    You did the same with SVS.

    I haven't kept track if any other software emerged that does the same as
    SVS and for free. Symantec didn't exactly make it disappear as I see
    they did incorporate it into some of their enterprise products. SVS
    was, after all, a means for IT folks to control multiple-version or
    conflicting software. The scheme was to have workstations get the app
    layer from their server (but the free version was limited so it didn't
    support policies, fancy exclusion/inclusion rules for app layer combos,
    or retrieving app layers from a server). It worked but I don't know if
    anything else came out at the consumer-level to replace it (and for
    free). I mentioned it to show there are ways to reliably maintain
    concurrent app layer definitions and decide which one(s) you wanted
    active at any time.

    If SVS were still around and supported in a freeware version, I wouldn't
    need to multi-boot, use VMs (except to isolate unknown or suspect
    software), do snapshots or image backups (to test software). I'd have
    it create a new app layer, install the app, and then decide when I
    wanted it active. Just a simple click from a popup menu from a tray
    icon. Alas, that disappeared and nothing showed up to replace it (I
    gave up looking after a couple years so I don't know if something showed
    up in the last few years).

    > I think my approach of multiple partitions, each with preferred OS
    > and its "native" browser is much more trustworthy.


    An approach you came up with 3 days after my post. I didn't know you
    were willing to incur the impact of having to reboot the host and wait
    for the OS to load to back up to speed to then start using another
    version of an app. I was trying to find something that was faster and
    possible concurrent; i.e., to test IE6, IE7, IE8, Chrome, Firefox, or
    whatever are your test environs, you could test them together rather
    than have to reboot and wait to test each one separately. The backup
    scheme (or snapshotting) was just a last method that I thought of but
    not much easier than your scheme (since you'd have to do an install of
    IE after a snaphot to use that later version).

    With an imaging program that provides for snapshotting (e.g., Easeus
    ToDo Workstation), it took me about 4 minutes to snapshot the OS
    partition. I'd then go "play" with whatever software I was
    experimenting with, or do my tweaking, or whatever. When I was done,
    restoring from the snapshot was under a minute. That's a hell of a lot
    faster than loading VMs or waiting for an OS to load when multi-booting
    (as you imply above). However, the problem there is you would have to
    image or snaphot and then spend the time to install the next version of
    IE or whatever was the app under test.

    Acronis TrueImage has their "Try & Decide" feature: enable it, play, and
    then reboot to wipe everything that changed. A separate product to do
    the same thing is Returnil. When you enable their safe mode, all disk
    writes are redirected to a virtual disk. I tested with benchmarks and
    the delay to write to the virtual disk was neglible (I couldn't measure
    a value outside the variance between tests). When you're done tweak
    testing, trialing unknown or suspect software, or you R-E-A-L-L-Y want
    to insure that your web browsing remains completely secret, you reboot.
    On reboot, you're back to use Windows and the real hard disk. The
    virtual disk isn't used on reboot so all changes that went there,
    including registry changes, are gone.

    I suspect you're talking about multi-booting. Yeah, that works, too, as
    long as you have enough Windows licenses for all of that. Read the
    EULA. The Windows XP specifies that the license is valid on one
    computer at a time but also alludes that only the currently active one
    counts as in use. We called Microsoft (sales, tech, legal) and were
    told we could use 1 XP license installed in multiple partition, on
    multiple removable hard disks, or on multiple hosts as long as only ONE
    instance of that license was active at a time. Vista and later got more
    restrictive in their licensing. With a VM, you would need at least 2 XP
    licenses: one for the host OS and one for the guest OS (inside the VM)
    since both are active at the same time. With multi-booting, you would
    only have one instance as active.

    If you go that route, I would suggest staying away from Microsoft's
    crappy dual-boot scheme. They actually require loading [part of] the
    kernel from one OS before you can decide if that's the one you want to
    continue loading or you want to load a different OS instance. Use a
    real multi-boot manager. GAG (gag.sourceforge.net) is freeware. You
    can even have it load from a floppy (don't about CD) to run from there
    before you decide to overwrite the MBR bootstrap code on the hard disk
    with the GAG bootstrap code.

    Personally I think the virtualized disk scheme (Acronis Try&Decide or
    Returnil) would be more convenient for you. I gave up doing multi-
    booting when I found this easier method. Of course, if you're in a
    testing environment where you need changes to remain permanent for an
    extended time then, yeah, virtualized disk that disappears on reboot
    won't meet your needs. VMs would but you don't want to go that route.
    VanguardLH, Feb 26, 2013
    #15
  16. Robert Baer

    Guest

    Go to http://www.pdftowordtool.com to download an effective pdf to word conversion tool for converting your pdf file to doc file or other word file format.
    , Feb 27, 2013
    #16
  17. Robert Baer

    Robert Baer Guest

    wrote:
    > Go to http://www.pdftowordtool.com to download an effective pdf to word conversion tool for converting your pdf file to doc file or other word file format.

    I may not have tried it; 80 percent chance it fails DOA, 10% fails
    not a 32bit app, 20% chance result is garbage (yes! adds to >100%).
    Robert Baer, Feb 28, 2013
    #17
  18. Robert Baer

    Robert Baer Guest

    Robert Baer wrote:
    > wrote:
    >> Go to http://www.pdftowordtool.com to download an effective pdf to
    >> word conversion tool for converting your pdf file to doc file or other
    >> word file format.

    > I may not have tried it; 80 percent chance it fails DOA, 10% fails not a
    > 32bit app, 20% chance result is garbage (yes! adds to >100%).
    >

    Miracle! I works! and reasonably accurate.
    Thanks.
    Robert Baer, Mar 3, 2013
    #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. t.rex
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    634
    Dan Shea
    May 3, 2004
  2. Chloe

    .PDF to .DOC converter

    Chloe, Jul 11, 2004, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    433
  3. neil

    PDF to DOC

    neil, Feb 26, 2005, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    480
    Robert Amtjip
    Feb 26, 2005
  4. Harry

    Why convert Word doc to PDF? Or vice versa

    Harry, Mar 8, 2005, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    511
    Wizard
    Mar 8, 2005
  5. PWB

    .pdf doc to word doc

    PWB, Sep 16, 2008, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    14
    Views:
    1,070
    chuckcar
    Sep 19, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page