Re: HTML vs. Adobe Acrobat

Subject: Re: HTML vs. Adobe Acrobat
From: Tim Altom <taltom -at- IQUEST -dot- NET>
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 1996 07:05:00 EST

At 09:41 PM 3/21/96 -0500, you wrote:
>I think you've made a reasonable decision, especially if you want to
preserve design integrity. However, you've lost some extensibility and
audience by not converting to HTML. To what extent you've lost it depends
upon the content and purpose of your documents, but the fact remains that
far more Web users use Netscape than they do Acrobat Reader.

>Ben Milstead

Hang on a moment there, Ben. If you've been keeping an eye on the Web,
you've noticed a lot more PDF files of late, and for good reason. Acrobat
Reader will run alongside Netscape, and that's how most people view the
files. Indeed, Netscape is planning to incorporate a PDF reader into its
next version, or so the scuttlebutt goes.

Right now, you hit the page with a standard HTML browser, which downloads a
page anyway, then you pick the PDF doc you want to view and IT downloads,
where you can read it with the Reader. It works the same way that looking at
a JPEG or GIF does; you load a specific viewer for it.

Tim Altom
Vice President
Simply Written, Inc.
317.899.5882 (voice)
317.899.5987 (fax)

Previous by Author: Re: Framemaker required
Next by Author: Project estimating and tracking
Previous by Thread: Re: HTML vs. Adobe Acrobat
Next by Thread: Re: HTML vs. Adobe Acrobat

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

Sponsored Ads

Sponsored Ads