Re: HTML vs. Adobe Acrobat

Subject: Re: HTML vs. Adobe Acrobat
From: David Jones/KSBEISD <David_Jones/KSBEISD -dot- KSBEISD -at- DATAHUB -dot- COM>
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 1996 10:49:27 HST

Minor point(s) to make ...

Acrobat is a proprietary solution. It is not available for *all* the platforms
that are connected to the Internet.

Web browsers are not proprietary as long as they conform to standard HTML (for
now, let's leave out of this the growing war between the two main publishers of
proprietary Web browsers -- Netscape and Microsoft).

Given that Acrobat is the proprietary, copyrighted product of one company, what
chance is there of anyone developing the equivalent of our plethora of
free/low-cost Web browsers? We're completely dependent on Adobe marketing to
decide to develop native Acrobat viewers.

Finally, creating a Portable Document File is not free or low cost, as far as I
know. I can write an HTML page using my existing wordprocessor, any of a number
of free HTML editors on many platforms, or my existing browser.

For high-volume work, such as web servers, programs can create customized HTML
on the fly. Tried that with Acrobat lately?

Forgive my grumbles about Acrobat. I'm still mad at Adobe for botching Display
Postscript! <G>

David Jones, Technical Writer
David_Jones/KSBEISD -dot- KSBEISD -at- Datahub -dot- com
Kamehameha Schools Bishop Estate

"I do not speak for my employer, my computer, or any other living thing."

Previous by Author: Re: Certification: opposing views
Next by Author: Re: To Do Archives
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