Re: HTML vs. Adobe Acrobat

Subject: Re: HTML vs. Adobe Acrobat
From: LaVonna Funkhouser <lffunkhouser -at- HALNET -dot- COM>
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 1996 08:44:56 -0600

Ben, assuming that Marsha's users are on a web now, your point is true,
but it will become moot if Adobe Acrobat Amber
(now available as a beta) is integrated with Netscape. (See

If her users will primarily receive the info on CD, then Acrobat
along with "Search for CD Rom" software should work fine for her

BTW, Marsha, the folks on the Acrobat e-mail list can probably give
you some more feedback.

We've worked with our clients to produce a CD that is mostly an HTML
Web with several PDF documents linked to it. It includes a web browser
and the freely distributable Acrobat Reader.


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. =20

>Ben Milstead

>>My company recently decided to stop investigating tools for
>>converting our FrameMaker products to HTML for distribution
>>on the web. Instead, they have decided to use the Adobe
>>Acrobat suite of products to provide our documents on-line
>>and on CD-ROM, with a search capability.>Marsha
>>cmawta -at- taux01 -dot- nsc -dot- com
LaVonna F. Funkhouser, COREComm
lffunkhouser -at- halnet -dot- com (work)
You are invited to browse our web site:
My opinions do not officially represent anyone other than me.

Previous by Author: Re: A Preposition *WHERE*?--Churchill again
Next by Author: Do You Know European? <HUMOR>
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