Re: HTML vs. Adobe Acrobat

Subject: Re: HTML vs. Adobe Acrobat
From: LaVonna <lffunkhouser -at- HALNET -dot- COM>
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 1996 11:04:20 -0600

Matthew B. Hicks wrote:

> Uh, has anyone actually tried to read an Acrobat doc? It's fine for
> delivering documents that you expect people to print out, but IMO it is
> not suitable for delivering info online.

Yes, I have, and I have two responses:

1. Documents *designed for* reading online in Acrobat can
be quite good. Adobe has some good ones on their "Sampler CD"
that they give out.

2. Ordinary (paper-based) documents that are converted to PDF
and viewed online can be made easier to read by using Acrobat's
"Articles" feature.

>And the
> navigation is a real chore -- even on a PowerMac, the pages are drawn
> excruciatingly slowly. I hate PDF files.

Most pages I deal with appear rather quickly, but complicated
drawings can really slow down online viewing.

lffunkhouser -at- halnet -dot- com

Previous by Author: Re: Contractions
Next by Author: Employment Opportunities, Houston, TX, USA
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