Re[2]: HTML v. Acrobat (was Electronic File Transfer)

Subject: Re[2]: HTML v. Acrobat (was Electronic File Transfer)
From: Arlen -dot- P -dot- Walker -at- JCI -dot- COM
Date: Mon, 11 Mar 1996 06:56:00 -0600

o The customer gets what they need a lot faster

You've obviously not visited some of the web pages I've been forced to
endure in order to get information. ;{>}

o The customer can link to other useful applications or functions
(not provided by Acrobat) without increasing overhead.

I've not tried this (yet) but Adobe has an Acrobat Plug-in which links to
URL's on the web, so this capability may already be here.

Besides, I'm wondering what the effects of Internet-related OpenDoc parts
may have on all this (Cyberdog is one example of this). It could easily
end up that the choices will not be "either/or" for a given document, but
rather "both/and."

Have fun,
Arlen

arlen -dot- p -dot- walker -at- jci -dot- com
-----------------------------------------------
In God we trust, all others must supply data
-----------------------------------------------


Previous by Author: Re[2]: Royalties from TECHWR-L ???
Next by Author: Re[2]: all this copyright stuff
Previous by Thread: Re: HTML v. Acrobat (was Electronic File Transfer)
Next by Thread: Re[2]: HTML v. Acrobat (was Electronic File Transfer)


What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads