Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Size of Adobe Reader Installers Through the Years

sigwait.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 141 posts

Re: The Size of Adobe Reader Installers Through the Years

#61

Post by RockyMcNuts »

ginko wrote: post #17
RockyMcNuts wrote: post #8

Why don't the labels on the points match the scale? Looks like a chart crime scene

The labels on the points are version numbers.

ok, that makes sense.

not indicated, and the general idea of dataviz is to communicate clearly. when you have a number, what it represents should be noted, and the units. if I see a number in that context, I assume it's calling out the value displayed.

the x axis is also a bit off, would ideally plot the date of the release and use a proper time axis.

a title is also good to have, maybe a data table.

sorry to be cranky but those who are downvoting , try to be clear, learn some standards, or stay away from publishing charts. you can even ask AI to clean up your code to conform to a standard. Soft skills are important for an engineer. You need to explain the work in clear, persuasive language and dataviz. or you can be, I'm a super-smart engineer, you figure out what I'm trying to say, I don't need to worry about making your eyes bleed. crikey.

https://www.datavizstyleguide.com/

https://www.amazon.com/Better-Data-Visualizations-Scholars-R...

https://guides.library.jhu.edu/datavisualization/scientific

https://github.com/rougier/scientific-visualization-book

Re: The Size of Adobe Reader Installers Through the Years

#62

Post by sixothree »

microflash wrote: post #21
kelsey98765431 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not super familiar with the windows ecosystem but my understanding is that scoop is a package manager similar to choco or nuget correct? is scoop seen as bloated? thanks

scoop is fine since it keeps itself confined to user profile, unlike some other package managers.

Doesn't winget prefer to respect the package source's intention?

Re: The Size of Adobe Reader Installers Through the Years

#63

Post by sixothree »

scrumper wrote: post #28
iJohnDoe wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All browsers open PDF files really well and sometimes better than Acrobat. Just need Chrome, Firefox, Edge, etc.

I'm generally looking at multi kilopage manuals where rapid search and navigation are important, and good zooming for diagrams. I didn't even try a browser as the machine is a bit constrained and I just thought it'd be too slow. But I'll try...

I've found Sumatra to be okay at best for PDF compatibility. There are definitely times, heck even in the last week, where PDFs have failed to load or loaded as blank pages. But even then it's still my default.

Re: The Size of Adobe Reader Installers Through the Years

#64

Post by 7bit »

tech234a wrote: post #10

Ads and many online features can be removed before installation of Adobe Reader by customizing the installer using the Adobe Reader Customization Wizard for Windows [1], where there is an optional labeled "Disable Upsell" [2]. There might also be a version for macOS [3]. It might also just be possible to just directly set the appropriate "FeatureLockDown" options in the registry/preferences in your system [4]. [1]: h…

Or I install an alternative where I don't have to do this.

Re: The Size of Adobe Reader Installers Through the Years

#65

Post by MBCook »

I switched to the Mac in ‘04 or ‘05. One thing that immediately impressed me was Preview, Nd how useful it was for PDFs. No more need for Adobe Reader.

I’m not surprised in the least it’s still bloated and terrible. But I don’t think I would have guessed it was pushing the size of a full CD.

What a joke.

Re: The Size of Adobe Reader Installers Through the Years

#66

Post by StrangeDoctor »

wanderingstan wrote: post #23
robin_reala wrote: post #2

Note: log scale on the y axis. Current Adobe reader is 83x bigger than current Sumatra according to the chart.

Yes. Log scale seems like a poor choice, given that the point is to show the relative size disparity.

For a technical audience, it’s probably one of the better choices, it’s probably a poor one for mass consumption.

A purely linear graph would absolutely crush their pdf installer and the first 15 years of adobe into a flat line

Re: The Size of Adobe Reader Installers Through the Years

#67

Post by wildzzz »

kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #53
robin_reala wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you’re talking Mac, why on earth would you install Adobe Reader? I’m sure there’s a different set of 5% functionality for power users, but Preview does everything I need (including things like signature annotation, real redaction, joining multiple PDFs together) and it does it quickly and with everything enabled for free.

There are a lot of classic PDF features that are still unimplemented by alternative viewers. For work I have to use Reader for clickable metadata popups that other viewers don't support.

There are two big features that Adobe supports that I just don't see common in other readers. First, the schematic capture application I use will generate a PDF of a schematic that has metadata of each component accessible by clicking it. The schematic will show "R179, 100ohms, 0.125W" but clicking to see the metadata will show a part number along with whatever other data the BOM has. No other reader I've used will show this data. Since the schematic PDF serves as our "immutable" copy that goes into our CRM system, it's nice that you have everything you need without having to open Cadence. I believe this is some sort of JavaScript extension to PDF that is likely incredibly exploitable so this is likely why no one else seems to support it (and why Adobe always seems subject to CVEs).

Second, we use Adobe's comments to markup released drawings or other documents for changes. Then both I and QA put our signatures on the PDF and it's either sent to the factory floor for immediate implementation or sent to the document owner for them to incorporate into a new release. Other readers don't always use comments the same way or don't respect the read only attribute that comments and signatures should have.

Re: The Size of Adobe Reader Installers Through the Years

#68

Post by pseudosavant »

maxloh wrote: post #39
behnamoh wrote: post #4

Adobe Reader is the first app I don't install on new machines. It's slow and sluggish, riddled with dark patterns and annoying pop ups, disrespects the user in every possible way, and hides basic editing functionality behind subscriptions. The trashiest piece of crap software. It's up there with MS Word (which gets progressively more bloated on Mac). Edit: Added "software" after crap for clarity.

Adobe Reader (or Acrobat Reader) is still the industry standard for PDF documents, though. I once found that a PDF file created with OnlyOffice displayed as intended on Chrome, but its embedded font couldn't be recognized or rendered correctly on Acrobat. I keep Acrobat installed only for verifying the integrity of the PDF files I've created.

I had to have Adobe Reader installed at my last job because there were official federal and state government PDFs we had to work with that only displayed correctly in Adobe Reader. Opening them in anything else, like Chrome, showed a different single page that said to open it in Adobe Reader.

Re: The Size of Adobe Reader Installers Through the Years

#69

Post by exmadscientist »

maxloh wrote: post #39
behnamoh wrote: post #4

Adobe Reader is the first app I don't install on new machines. It's slow and sluggish, riddled with dark patterns and annoying pop ups, disrespects the user in every possible way, and hides basic editing functionality behind subscriptions. The trashiest piece of crap software. It's up there with MS Word (which gets progressively more bloated on Mac). Edit: Added "software" after crap for clarity.

Adobe Reader (or Acrobat Reader) is still the industry standard for PDF documents, though. I once found that a PDF file created with OnlyOffice displayed as intended on Chrome, but its embedded font couldn't be recognized or rendered correctly on Acrobat. I keep Acrobat installed only for verifying the integrity of the PDF files I've created.

What I miss from Acrobat is its Print dialog. Yes, really, the Print dialog. I've had to install the whole bloated mess just to get that dialog.

Why? PDFs are often print-first documents. Sometimes I need to print them. Sometimes my printer needs a little coaxing to get the perfect output. Acrobat's Print dialog has enough capability to do this immediately, no fuss. Others simply don't. If SumatraPDF had the same capabilities instead of just dumping everything onto the cruddy Win95-era system default Print dialog, I don't think I'd ever use anything else.

Post reply on HN