Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered


DUPE!!! (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12232126)

Adobe Reader 7.0 Coming to Linux [slashdot.org] - Described how to download it.

Re:DUPE!!! (2, Informative)

Cylix (55374) | about 9 years ago | (#12232143)

Yeah, I grabbed it that same day too...

It was already released then...

Still, they didn't mention the download location then, so I suppose it counts as the second half of the article with a generous portion of laziness in between.

Re:DUPE!!! (3, Funny)

mavenguy (126559) | about 9 years ago | (#12232227)

Oh, come on, give 'em a break.

It's been almost a whole three weeks since that earth-shattering story... I'm sure most /.'ers totally forgot it.

Besides, as one TV network exec once said, defending reruns, something to the effect of "If you didn't see it first time, it's new to you!!"

Re:DUPE!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12232239)

The difference is they have officially announced it while previously someone 'discovered' it on their site. Adobe is now bound to support it if you have any problems. And linux users can now say another big official app has joined linux.

Now if only Adobe would bring Photoshop over as well...

Re:DUPE!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12232252)

But the application was already on Linux, just in previous versions. v7 isn't even that old on Windows.

Re:DUPE!!! (5, Insightful)

metricmusic (766303) | about 9 years ago | (#12232259)

The difference is it is now officially announced while previously someone 'discovered' it on their site. Adobe couldve claimed it was a test, beta product and not given any support for it at all. Now Adobe must stand behind the product it has made, and linux users can now say another big official app has joined their platform of choice.

Now if only Adobe would bring Photoshop over as well...

mod (-5, DUPE) (0, Redundant)

essreenim (647659) | about 9 years ago | (#12232304)

This is sooo old news. And acrobat reader has been available for Linux for centuries...

In other fresh and hot news:

****THE POPe HAS DIES*****

old (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12232128)

has been on gentoo portage for like a month now

Re:old (1)

blixel (158224) | about 9 years ago | (#12232154)

has been on gentoo portage for like a month now

What's the package? I can't find it.

Re:old (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12232179)


Heh (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12232198)

She's just trolling you. There's no such package, because you can't install binaries on Gentoo and there's no source code for Adobe.

Simple, eh?

Re:old (0, Flamebait)

Mr. Underbridge (666784) | about 9 years ago | (#12232226)

has been on gentoo portage for like a month now

Oddly enough, none of us care. I want my "-1, User is a Gentoo Zealot" mod.

Re:old (1)

R.D.Olivaw (826349) | about 9 years ago | (#12232279)

all he did was point out that it's been in portage for some time! How does that make him a zealot? If somebody mentioned that the fedora rpm has been around for a while, would that make him/her a fedora zealot?

Well I guess I shouldn't point out something like that around here. Writing Microsoft without a $ sign or some mispelling makes you a troll, having a mac makes you a fanboy, well why not mentioninng portage makes you a zealot.

Re:old (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12232288)

Mmm...nothing like geek-envy to bring out the ad hominem attacks...

Re:old (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12232289)

Which fanboy are you?

  1. Windows

    You wear wraparound sunglasses, even indoors. You wish your mother would let you ride a motorbike. You tell your friends you're pulling in $50,000 a year and $2,000 a month "playing the stock market" but in reality you're only bringing in half that and your dividends from MSFT havn't been good in years. Your non computing friends all turn to you for help; you only charge $30 an hour. Your collegues talk about you behind your back. Your workplace nickname is likely to be "The Asshole". Unlike the Linux fanboys, you actually try to pick up dates in bars but women laugh at you.
  2. Apple

    You think you're so cool you hurt. You have mirrors on every wall in your "loft apartment", which is really a grimy little apartment next to a guy who plays Guns 'n Roses at 3am. All of your furniture is from Ikea. You sometimes think that changing your name to "Steve" would be "pretty cool". When you go to bars you only drink Miller Lite. No body ever asks you for help with their computers because they know you don't know anything but OS X, even if you do tell them you "run Unix" now. Your friends openly laugh at you.
  3. Linspire

    You regularly give $10 bills to homeless guys because you have too much money. Computers baffle you, but you enjoy looking at pictures of naked women. You don't know what Linux is, but you continually bugged the IT guy at work about your computer so he installed Linspire on your machine.
  4. Umbongo

    You shop at GAP. You probably used to use a Mac. When you saw the multiracial image used as a desktop picture and heard that this operating system came from the same country as Nelson Mandela, you knew it was for you. You meet with your friends in fair-trade coffee houses and talk about the eventual overthrow of evil corporations such as Microsoft and Starbucks. Like the Linspire user, you have very little real knowlege when it comes to computers but you would never use your computer to look at pictures of women degrading themselves.
  5. Gentoy

    You've been "into computers" for ohh, one or two years now and fancy yourself as "a bit of a hacker". Wouldn't know C from C++, or even Perl for that matter. Older Gentoy users may be building their homes from matchsticks. You've explained to all your friends that your matchstick house will have an "optimised floorplan". They've tried to tell you that your house violates every known building code and law in your area, but you've ignored them so far because you can't read those complicated regulatory documents.
  6. Linux From Scratch

    Much like the Gentoy user but you'd also be into sadomasochistic sex if you could get it. You're not just building a house from matchsticks, you're planing to grow the trees to make the matchsticks. You've cleared some land but don't know what to do next because you havn't read the books you've got, so you've posted to alt.arborists.newbie asking for help. It's been three days so far and no one has replied. You remain hopeful.

a start? (3, Informative)

R.D.Olivaw (826349) | about 9 years ago | (#12232130)

How is this making a start? Acrobat reader 6 didn't count?

Re:a start? (5, Informative)

Gtz (18854) | about 9 years ago | (#12232140)

There was no Acrobat reader 6 on Linux, that release was skipped. The last version before 7 was 5.0.10.

Re:a start? (1)

R.D.Olivaw (826349) | about 9 years ago | (#12232151)

very true. I only realised it after clicking submit. please read above "version 5 didn't count".
Thanks for the correction :)

Re:a start? (4, Interesting)

Apreche (239272) | about 9 years ago | (#12232196)

AFAIK Acrobat Reader 6 was never released for Linux. Because of this Linux users had to either use the deplorable acroread (Reader 5) or other open source pdf viewers like xpdf, gpdf, etc. All of which were far from perfect. Most of which were painful to use. And none of which supported all the features of newer pdf files like editing forms and such.

This Acrobat Reader 7 is significant because its the first quality and full featured Linux pdf viewer. It also shows that Adobe aknowledges the existence and importance of Linux and that the demands and complaints made against them about the situation did not go unanswered.

key mapping! (2, Informative)

xixax (44677) | about 9 years ago | (#12232210)

I hope they actually bother paying attention to my mouse preferences. Version 5 ignores my scroll wheel and it uses clunky Motif widgets (bleagh). More likely they'll only use the opportunity include some of the more unpleasant misfeatures like spying. Xix.

Re:key mapping! (2, Informative)

afd8856 (700296) | about 9 years ago | (#12232301)

> ... like spying

Checked. They've added EcmaScript to the pdf, now it's possible to call websites with that. I think I read right here on ./ about a company that offers pdf tracking.

key maapping (0, Redundant)

xixax (44677) | about 9 years ago | (#12232238)

I hope they actually bother paying attention to my mouse preferences. Version 5 ignores my scroll wheel and it uses clunky Motif widgets (bleagh).

More likely they'll only use the opportunity include some of the more unpleasant misfeatures like spying [lwn.net] .

(damn mouse button!)

Finally! (0, Flamebait)

bigtallmofo (695287) | about 9 years ago | (#12232133)

Now Linux users can share in shoddy intrusive software that causes all sorts of incessant errors!

Hurray for version 7!

Re:Finally! (1)

Ann1ka (604222) | about 9 years ago | (#12232202)

True, it has a few new annoyances, like opening different documents as child windows within the same application window. But the GTK2 interface is so much better than the previous one. Working with acroread in the past was just hellish: searching was bad, redraw bugs, open & save boxes from the darkages. Still, I used it a lot because of it's superior rendering and speed compared to other 'free' tools like xpdf, kpdf, etc.

Since Acrobat Reader 7 my life has gotten a little easier.

not to forget calling home software (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12232290)

see http://lwn.net/Articles/129729/

WTF?! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12232135)

I've been using acroread 7.0 on Linux for ages now. It's been in Debian for a long time.

What's the big deal?

Re:WTF?! (1)

debilo (612116) | about 9 years ago | (#12232242)

I think what you used was the beta version. I used acroread7 on FreeBSD (installed it a few weeks ago), but it was rolled back to v5 again because v7 was still in beta.

Open source Acrobat? (1)

elliot.mackenzie (853463) | about 9 years ago | (#12232136)

That'll be the day.

Re:Open source Acrobat? (1)

afd8856 (700296) | about 9 years ago | (#12232205)

But just like microsoft, they have open sourced some software (some framework to do GUIs, I remember).

I think the big companies see finished products as institutional assets, and framework as something they can share, as it will not directly compete with their products.

Re:Open source Acrobat? (4, Insightful)

TheRaven64 (641858) | about 9 years ago | (#12232275)

Not to mention the far more important fact:

The full PDF specification is available for free download from Adobe's web site. It's in PDF format, so in the worst case you would need to use their (free beer. Mmm. Free beer...) software to print it, but there is nothing stopping you from writing your own software to create or display PDFs. By doing this, they have helped make PDF a common standard, and associated the name Adobe with PDF. I work with PDFs a lot - I read and review material in PDF format, create PDF documents from LaTeX including images and diagrams saved as PDFs, and I don't use a single Adobe product.

Great (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12232137)

I've tried it - it's slower than a retarded kid hopped up on goofballs tired to a tree.

Acrobat for Linux? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12232138)

An acrobat reader has been around for linux for a few years now, this certainly isn't news.

37Mb??!?!?! (5, Informative)

phunkymunky (725609) | about 9 years ago | (#12232144)

37Mb RPM?! I think i'll just stick with gpdf...

Re:37Mb??!?!?! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12232243)

Yeah, that would be fine if gpdf actually worked correctly and had decent features.

I hate acroread as much as anyone but it's fully featured and works correctly with pretty much everything.

Re:37Mb??!?!?! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12232299)

Aw the poor linux weenie can't handle a 37 meg installer on his 386SX16 from 1989. He's still more elite than us though since his workstation can double as a server.

I... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12232145)

Wonder if it'll try to install crap, like the windows version trys to install the Yahoo! toolbar.

Re:I... (2, Informative)

Lussarn (105276) | about 9 years ago | (#12232225)

It has a button in the upper right corner which opens a browser where you can buy books, it also has some form of Yahoo search in it. I try to keep my computer as clean as possible from commercial interests and this program is borderline. 99% of the time gpdf works fine anyway.

emerge -C for you acrobat.

Ive used for some time (-1, Redundant)

xtracto (837672) | about 9 years ago | (#12232155)

I have been using the new version for a week and much more impressed with it than I was with version 5.

Here are the things I like:

* Uses GTK. I am not GTK fanboy (I prefer GNUStep), but at least it is better than that awful interface the previous versions had.
* Mozilla plugin that works just like it does on the popular legacy operating system still floating around out there.
* It is basically a tar file, no hidden toolbars to install for you.
* Way snappier than the previous version.
* No more having to mess with numlock to get pgup/pgdn working.
* Has preference settings for a MUA a web browser and several other apps you can launch for various functions (e.g., I open a PDF in Firefox and click the email button to see it open a new compose window in Thunderbird with the PDF I am viewing in Firefox already attached. Sweet!)

Things I don't like:

* The went to that blasted MDI. I want every flipping document to open in its own window. Is that so hard? Is it too much to ask?
* The OK button in all the dialogs is squished, quite annoying.
* You must manually include it in your menu. It should at least hit the majors (GNOME, KDE).

Re:Ive used for some time (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12232269)

GNUStep?! LOL... You know, the 80's were a long time ago.

MDI is pretty much the same thing as tabs. Do you not use tabs in Firefox? Or maybe you're just spouting off some garbage you've been fed about MDI sucking and why we don't need MDI. Hint: MDI was never really a bad thing, it just needed a little help (tabs). OS X uses pretty much the same idea to manage applications. Having 100 little windows all over your system is retarded.

Do you have a mullet also?

Re:Ive used for some time (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12232277)

This reply is an exact copy of the comment in an earlier thread about Acrobat 7 being released for Linux. The poster is a karma whore.

Re:Ive used for some time (5, Informative)

koh (124962) | about 9 years ago | (#12232291)

Nice try, you miserable cut&paste clod.

For the record, your post is basically a complete rip of this post [slashdot.org] by El Cubano [slashdot.org] with a couple of lines stacked in front of it. Moderators, please act accordingly.

I do not think behavior such as yours should be encouraged. Actually, I hope you'll reincarnate into some exotic frog, SCO techie, or worse.

Re:Ive used for some time (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12232305)

+5 Informative

Lol In your face asshole, keep crying

Re:Ive used for some time (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12232294)

* You must manually include it in your menu. It should at least hit the majors (GNOME, KDE).

That's odd, on my suse 9.1 machine it was automatically added to the kde menu.

Not surprising (-1, Redundant)

robwicks (18453) | about 9 years ago | (#12232158)

IIRC, versions 5 and 6 were also put out for Linux. Shouldn't the title then be, "Adobe continues to support Linux"? Though why they would discontinue such support is beyond me, since the OS is more popular now than ever. Must *really* be a slow news day to let this one slip in on the front page.

Re:Not surprising (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12232253)

There was a 5.0.4 version for linux offered until a couple of days ago when the 7.0 version became available. Adobe never did release a version 6 for linux.

Overweight...stop eating junk food, Adobe Reader (1)

TheStick (847894) | about 9 years ago | (#12232159)

38 megs just so I could read a damn pdf. Sure, no big deal... kpdf, xpdf and the others put together don't need that much space. I can't wait to see how many gigs it eats up once uncompressed!

Re:Overweight...stop eating junk food, Adobe Reade (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12232186)

Doesn't it include loads of fonts?

This one will also let you fill in PDF forms.

Finally! (1)

Flying Purple Wombat (787087) | about 9 years ago | (#12232166)

Last Adobe reader was version 5.0. I've needed an update for a while now.

I honestly don't care if it's open source or not. The reader is free, and that's good enough.

OT - I clicked "download" on Adobe's site, and RealPlayer tried to play the RPM! Strange....(Fedora Core 3, Firefox 1.02, RealPlayer 10.02.608)

More OT - FP?

Re:Finally! (1)

Mr. Underbridge (666784) | about 9 years ago | (#12232256)

OT - I clicked "download" on Adobe's site, and RealPlayer tried to play the RPM! Strange....(Fedora Core 3, Firefox 1.02, RealPlayer 10.02.608)

It'll do that. I've never had RP installed and *not* had it do that by default.

Btw, how'd it sound? ;)

Direct link (3, Informative)

xtracto (837672) | about 9 years ago | (#12232169)

Re:Direct link (1)

DocSnyder (10755) | about 9 years ago | (#12232261)

Why use a mirror? Let's /. Adobe so they can see that the GNU/Linux platform is important enough to support, especially with other Adobe products.

No 64-bit version? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12232170)

Too bad can't run it in my pure 64-bit Gentoo.

too little, too late (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12232172)

Unforunately for Adobe kpdf 3.4 is already the best reader under linux..

Re:too little, too late (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12232213)

Still, you can't fill in PDF forms or create encrypted and signed PDFs with that useless piece of free software crap.

Client? Where's the server? (1)

PsyQ (87838) | about 9 years ago | (#12232174)

How does Adobe Reader qualify as a client program of any sort? That would require a server component and some sort of protocol between the two, wouldn't it?

Re:Client? Where's the server? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12232191)

Actually, PDFs can interact with servers to take form submissions.

This is old news... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12232176)

Wake up guys, it's been in debian (testing) for weeks!

(which should convince the reader that this is extremeley old news)

(no, I assure you, I'm a Debian fan!)

It seems to me... (1)

A Sea and Cake (874933) | about 9 years ago | (#12232177)

It seems to me that Adobe really has no self-motivated reason to go open-source with Acrobat Reader.

After all, why would they want to increase the possibility of someone reverse-engineering the PDF format and writing free/open source Acrobat production applications, when they're currently selling about seven of them [adobe.com] , and all for a hefty chunk of change?

Re:It seems to me... (1)

2old2rockNroll (572607) | about 9 years ago | (#12232264)

After all, why would they want to increase the possibility of someone reverse-engineering the PDF format

The PDF format is not a secret as demonstrated by all the PDF readers available for Linux.

Re:It seems to me... (3, Informative)

Dot.Com.CEO (624226) | about 9 years ago | (#12232270)

The PDF format is open. You can print to PDF off every platform and office suite except Office on Windows.

Re:It seems to me... (5, Insightful)

Geeky (90998) | about 9 years ago | (#12232278)

Reverse engineer pdf? I thought you could download the spec of the pdf format from Adobe's site. They also publish the spec of the tiff format, and are behind the new digital negative format that is an effort to replace proprietory digital camera RAW formats with an open format.

Closed programs, open formats is, to my mind, a reasonable compromise for a commercial organisation.

Re:It seems to me... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12232284)

After all, why would they want to increase the possibility of someone reverse-engineering the PDF format and writing free/open source Acrobat production applications, when they're currently selling about seven of them, and all for a hefty chunk of change?

Except, of course, that there is no need at all to reverse-engineer the PDF format, since the full PDF specifications are available for download [adobe.com] from Adobe, free of charge. And since there are oodles [ghostscript.com] of [tug.org] open-source [pdflib.com] software [ros.co.nz] that will write PDF.

Regards, Felix!

Re:It seems to me... (1)

DrXym (126579) | about 9 years ago | (#12232296)

You don't need to reverse engineer PDF because Adobe publish the specifications on their website. Which is probably why there already open source readers and creators - for example OpenOffice. Presumably companies pay that hefty chunk of change because the commercial variants are better suited to whatever workflow they're being used for.

Re:It seems to me... (1)

tigersha (151319) | about 9 years ago | (#12232306)

They do not need anyone to reverse engineer the PDF format. You can download it straight from their website. Stupid kneejerk.

Photoshop (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12232178)

The only significant thing they could ever do is of course a Linux version of Photoshop. It will have crappy old static linked GTK / homemade interface like Acrobat, but people (sheeple) don't care.

I feel sorry for subscribers... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12232181)

The front page five minutes ago should have read: "The next Slashdot story was ready two weeks ago, and subscribers can kick themselves for giving us their money!"

The Nod by Those in Grey Suits and Burgundy Ties (1)

malia8888 (646496) | about 9 years ago | (#12232185)

"The rate of adoption of Linux among enterprises worldwide is increasing, especially among government and financial services organisations," said Eugene Lee, vice president of product marketing at Adobe.

It appears by this announcement that Linux is being viewed by the world at large as a viable, everyday, grey-suited respectable OS. Who would have thunk it? I remember the days when it was the pap of those of us living in our parent's basements!! :-P

reader 'client' ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12232187)

Why is it a reader 'client'? Is there a reader 'server' as well?

Does it support the DRM schemes ? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12232188)

How coudl they open source Reader when it embeds some DRM algorithm used for ebooks.

Blog [hirlimann.net]

Better still.... (0, Offtopic)

turgid (580780) | about 9 years ago | (#12232190)

I've been using Acrobat Reader on Linux for at least 5 years now.

More usefully, if you want free as in beer and open as in source software to create PDFs on Linux get yourself over to OpenOffice.org [openoffice.org]

Reader Extensions (1)

xtracto (837672) | about 9 years ago | (#12232192)

One really cool thing about the 7.0 version of Adobe Readers is that they can be extended with Adobe LiveCycle Reader Extensions [adobe.com] to add features that are normally only available when you buy Adobe Acrobat. Of course, Reader Extensions costs something. But what's great is that given the right "pixie dust", Linux is no longer a platform for just viewing PDFs, but it can do PDF Collaboration and forms routing just like its Windows and Macintosh counterparts.

One step at a time.. (2, Insightful)

deacon (40533) | about 9 years ago | (#12232193)

Any release of commercial software for Linux is good, and Adobe should be thanked for doing this.

I have used Xpdf exclusively for a long time. In what way is Adobe reader superior to Xpdf?

is this news? (1, Redundant)

gustgr (695173) | about 9 years ago | (#12232194)

adobe acrobat reader has been out there for a while (at least for 5 or 6 years).

New move into open source? (1)

DJ Marvin (750482) | about 9 years ago | (#12232206)

Adobe has been releasing Acrobat for linux for years. This doesn't count as 'an step towards open sourcing the reader'.

For some real open source steps, look into their site. They have some nice UI rendering framework there for free (and open source).

huh? a start towards what? (4, Insightful)

dAzED1 (33635) | about 9 years ago | (#12232207)

No news on open sourcing the client, but they're making a start

What the hell? So is every commercial company out there just supposed to release everything as open source? Good grief Charlie Brown...why would they do that?

There are plenty of Open Source options for reading pdf's. There's no reason to expect/demand that a commercial software company should open source their products. I mean, come on people...enough is enough.

much better than acroread5, not as fast as xpdf (1)

poopie (35416) | about 9 years ago | (#12232208)

acrobat 7 for Linux is definitely an improvement, but after *not* having it and using xpdf, I'm not sure which one I like better.

Speedy (5, Funny)

Frogbert (589961) | about 9 years ago | (#12232216)

I downloaded, installed and ran it a couple of hours ago. I expect it to be done loading real soon now.

javascript and privacy (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12232221)

See http://lwn.net/Articles/129729/ why you
should handle it with care, if privacy is important to you.

both good and bad (2, Insightful)

zerkon (838861) | about 9 years ago | (#12232222)

xpdf has always functioned MUCH faster and with MUCH greater stability than any version of acrobat I've ever seen.

That said, Any large commercial vendor releasing their software on Linux is a very good thing. Maybe next some more video game vendors will jump on the bandwagon.

And of course competition is always good. This forces both xpdf and adobe to make themselves better.

Open source not needed - open formats rule (4, Insightful)

iamacat (583406) | about 9 years ago | (#12232223)

PDF format is open and there are a number of open source viewers for Linux. I don't think it's that important that Adobe open source their reader or even port it at all. This is just one extra option, no big news for us.

Spyware, Encumbered? (2, Informative)

Speare (84249) | about 9 years ago | (#12232230)

There's been recent talk about new document "tracking" features that require a call home to read, and other stupid "smart data" junk which require a blackbox client. If Adobe expects me to run their spyware on my Linux machine, they have another think coming.

What's the big deal wth open source??!?!?!?!? (1)

Tsunayoshi (789351) | about 9 years ago | (#12232233)

Why the fsck should it matter whether or not it is open source? Why can't the community merely be happy that yet another major piece of software is available for the unices?* Just because the kernel and a huge amount of other apps are some sort of open-source licensed DOES NOT MEAN that every frickin piece of software needs to be as well. As has been stated already, if you are that much of a free-license bible thumper, there are plenty of open-source apps that let you do the same basic thing: read a PDF file. Just don't use Adobe's...it's all about choice, right? * yes I know Adobe has made readers available before for unix/linux, I have been using it on Solaris since Acrobat Reader 4.x.

Printing sux (0, Redundant)

vandan (151516) | about 9 years ago | (#12232241)

They're idea of a printing interface is 'lpr'.
gpdf is faster and has a *much* better ( gnome ) printing interface.

Using it, works well (2, Informative)

starseeker (141897) | about 9 years ago | (#12232245)

I have used kpdf, gpdf, and xpdf as well - they work OK, but in my experience Acrobat Reader is still the goto client if you have a pdf the others can't read or for advanced features. The others are steadily improving, and I think will get there in time, but basically until kpdf/gpdf/xpdf start opening pdf documents as well as or better than Acrobat for all available features, I fear Acrobat Reader will still be around.

Incidently, 7.0 seems to be a huge leap from version 5. Works much better with modern Linux software, despite a few lingering quirks. I had not heard of any pressure or consideration on the part of Adobe to release the code to Reader, but that would seriously rock if they did.

I note with some amusement that the Linux version of Acrobat Reader still has the purchase Adobe Acrobat link in the menus, despite a version not being available on Linux.

Why should they open source it? (2, Insightful)

DrXym (126579) | about 9 years ago | (#12232257)

If you want open source, use Ghostscript. I assume (and they probably do too) that to open source part of one of their most lucrative product lines would commercial suicide. It's not like the file format is closed because it isn't [adobe.com] .

Thumbs up...no crashes... (2, Insightful)

Spoing (152917) | about 9 years ago | (#12232258)

For me, v.7 is slick and hasn't crashed. Good job Adobe!

v.5 did crash quite a bit, esp. the browser plugin. Very frustrating. It was comparitively ugly too.

For Debian users... (4, Informative)

kbmccarty (575443) | about 9 years ago | (#12232265)

Christian Marillat has made available unofficial Debian packages of Acrobat 7 since a few weeks now. On sarge or sid, add the following to /etc/apt/sources.list:

deb ftp://ftp.nerim.net/debian-marillat/ testing main
deb-src http://perso.wanadoo.fr/debian/ unstable main

Then it's as easy as apt-get update; apt-get install acroread mozilla-acroread. This gives you the core functionality and Web browser plugin. (Incidentally, there are a bunch of other useful unofficial debs there, including mplayer and lame.)

You can also install the Javascript plugin and a whole bunch of other Acrobat plugins with apt-get install acroread-plugins. However, be aware that some plugins may report back to the mother ship: LWN article [lwn.net] . Also, they will eat another 43 MB of disk space.

WARNING! Document tracking included (5, Informative)

Idaho (12907) | about 9 years ago | (#12232266)

Be sure to read this article [lwn.net] before you install the reader.

The software contains functionality that could cause serious privacy concerns - it is possible to include a tracking mechanism in PDF's, readers that this great 'feature' will then contact some website and keep track of how many people read that document.

It's a start? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#12232267)

Why does every single thing need to be open sourced. I think it's pretty cool they are releasing a Linux binary.

Why do they have to Open Source? (3, Insightful)

MosesJones (55544) | about 9 years ago | (#12232287)

I know this is Slashdot and all. But if people expect that everytime a company releases a product for Linux that they MUST OpenSource it or they have "only made a start" then there will never be a market for Linux.

So if Adobe released Photoshop for Linux should they OpenSource it? Are Oracle "only making a start" by supporting Linux because they don't Open Source their database ?

Wake up people. This is good news that people consider Linux a platform worth supporting. This isn't the "start" this is the game.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account