156 MB
-
That's the size of Adobe Acrobat. An app that displays PDF files. 156 million bytes. To contrast, Foxit Reader is 3.4 MB. My head asplode.
cheers Chris Maunder
Surely you mean 163.5 million bytes? Or are you using that simpleton MB for Apple users?
Regards, Rob Philpott.
-
Surely you mean 163.5 million bytes? Or are you using that simpleton MB for Apple users?
Regards, Rob Philpott.
-
He is correct: Kibibyte - Wikipedia[^].
(flame war on vexata questio arriving)
Well, that depends on whether you accept the authority of a group who wish to redefine the meaning of an ubiquitous term stretching long into the past. I'll accept there's two mainstream meanings of MB out there today, but in my very humble opinion one is correct, and one is meddling. :)
Regards, Rob Philpott.
-
That's the size of Adobe Acrobat. An app that displays PDF files. 156 million bytes. To contrast, Foxit Reader is 3.4 MB. My head asplode.
cheers Chris Maunder
-
Never heard of Foxit, but just downloaded free version (FoxitReader94) and the download is 74Mb... though it does seem to do a lot more than just display PDFs... good find, thank you!
-
Never heard of Foxit, but just downloaded free version (FoxitReader94) and the download is 74Mb... though it does seem to do a lot more than just display PDFs... good find, thank you!
I'm using the "portable" version (which goes for many apps), and Foxit contains a "facebook" plugin of 4 Mb after install. It runs happily without it. See \App\Foxit Reader\plugins.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^] "If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
-
Well, that depends on whether you accept the authority of a group who wish to redefine the meaning of an ubiquitous term stretching long into the past. I'll accept there's two mainstream meanings of MB out there today, but in my very humble opinion one is correct, and one is meddling. :)
Regards, Rob Philpott.
-
That's the size of Adobe Acrobat. An app that displays PDF files. 156 million bytes. To contrast, Foxit Reader is 3.4 MB. My head asplode.
cheers Chris Maunder
-
That's the size of Adobe Acrobat. An app that displays PDF files. 156 million bytes. To contrast, Foxit Reader is 3.4 MB. My head asplode.
cheers Chris Maunder
-
That's the size of Adobe Acrobat. An app that displays PDF files. 156 million bytes. To contrast, Foxit Reader is 3.4 MB. My head asplode.
cheers Chris Maunder
-
That's the size of Adobe Acrobat. An app that displays PDF files. 156 million bytes. To contrast, Foxit Reader is 3.4 MB. My head asplode.
cheers Chris Maunder
For the installer or the installed size? I do repack and deployments. Acrobat Reader is one that I have to do about once a year and every year the installer gets bigger and bigger. It seems the installer increases in size 4 or 5 times faster than the code it's installing.
Asking questions is a skill CodeProject Forum Guidelines Google: C# How to debug code Seriously, go read these articles.
Dave Kreskowiak -
I don't use Foxit, has it all the add-ins to sign pdfs, comment, mark and so on?
M.D.V. ;) If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about? Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
-
I'm using the "portable" version (which goes for many apps), and Foxit contains a "facebook" plugin of 4 Mb after install. It runs happily without it. See \App\Foxit Reader\plugins.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^] "If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
As per one of my messages above: The realization that FoxIt comes with a Facebook plugin is when I decided FoxIt needed to go. I realize it can be disabled (and you have to *keep* disabling after every update). But when the maker of a PDF reader decides that there has to be a component to integrate (in some fashion - *any* fashion) with Facebook - we can't possibly be on the same page. Myself, I use [Sumatra PDF](https://www.sumatrapdfreader.org/free-pdf-reader.html). It's kinda ugly, but that's a non-issue.
-
That's the size of Adobe Acrobat. An app that displays PDF files. 156 million bytes. To contrast, Foxit Reader is 3.4 MB. My head asplode.
cheers Chris Maunder
And if you look at the settings, when you use it to import something to compile a pdf, you'll see that the default compatibility option is acrobat 4 -- so they've been bloating and bloating the thing for years, but it still produces files identical to the ones made in version 4. Something that always bugged me was that it's a huge shell around postscript, designed for working with documents, but there is no File-->New option. It can't even create one of its own files! I gave up on it -- sick of paying a couple of hundred for each update -- when it exceeded 80 MB (version 6). And I blame adobe for the fact that we're stuck with the comparatively lame XML, now, rather than postscript. Adobe acted like they owned postscript, so it fell out of use -- and then someone had a Great! New! Idea! called XML, which is like a stripped-down version of postscript, with its teeth pulled.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
-
Surely you mean 163.5 million bytes? Or are you using that simpleton MB for Apple users?
Regards, Rob Philpott.
I can never remember which MB is which. It's a good thing it's not money; I'd get ripped off something awful.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
-
That's the size of Adobe Acrobat. An app that displays PDF files. 156 million bytes. To contrast, Foxit Reader is 3.4 MB. My head asplode.
cheers Chris Maunder
Chris Maunder wrote:
My head asplode.
So, then, Adobe "got some 'splainin' to do"?
The best way to improve Windows is run it on a Mac. The best way to bring a Mac to its knees is to run Windows on it. ~ my brother Jeff
-
dandy72 wrote:
it had a Facebook plugin.
seriously? for what? :confused::confused: :omg: :omg:
M.D.V. ;) If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about? Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
-
Chris Maunder wrote:
My head asplode.
So, then, Adobe "got some 'splainin' to do"?
The best way to improve Windows is run it on a Mac. The best way to bring a Mac to its knees is to run Windows on it. ~ my brother Jeff
MacSpudster wrote:
So, then, Adobe "got some 'splainin' to do"?
That's splain as the nose on your face!
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
-
dandy72 wrote:
it had a Facebook plugin.
seriously? for what? :confused::confused: :omg: :omg:
M.D.V. ;) If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about? Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
-
That's the size of Adobe Acrobat. An app that displays PDF files. 156 million bytes. To contrast, Foxit Reader is 3.4 MB. My head asplode.
cheers Chris Maunder
About fifteen years ago, I was working in a company where Free and Open Source Software was holy, Foxit representet the True Freedom from Commercialism, the one any Free person should use. (It is sort of suprising how some communities directe and limit the freedom of free people, claiming to support that same freedom of choice!) At that time, Foxit had just terrible font rendering, especiall at small sizes. I had to keep Foxit available in case someone looked over my shoulder, but when nobody watched me, I used Acrobat Reader, which had far better font rendering. Over the years since then, I have tried new versions of Foxit. Again and again, I concluded, by watching the same document side by side in Foxit and Reader, that they still haven't learned. I gave up Foxit a few years ago, didn't care to try it anymore. Just a waste of time. Maybe it has improved. Maybe it today can compete with Reader on font rendering in general, and in particular in small sizes. I am not going to waste more time on it. Isn't just every program today in the range of a couple hundred MB, or a couple GB? What is your worry? Can't you afford the disk space? Does it load too slowly? Won't it fit in your RAM space? Adobe Reader never gave me any worries in those directions. It presents the documents for me, in a high quality rendering, causing no problems. So I do not search for any poor man's substitute, even though it is cheaper in terms of disk/memory footprint.