Adobe Acrobat 9 Released, CS 3.3 Available

[Scooterman1]

A lower priced alternative to Acrobat would be nice. I have 6.0 but they really charge a lot for their upgrades.

At least MS Word, and better yet, OpenOffice 3.0 does a pretty good job of saving.

Wow, just checked and Sun has a Beta Extension for OOO to allow importing! Awesome.

 

[ChrisA]

I must be reading this wrong. Is it saying you need to pay $160 if you want to upgrade your CS3 to CS3.3? Or is that just to get the Acrobat 9 update only?

I think upgrading CS3 to CS3.3 is exactly the same thing as getting the Acrobat 9 update. So the price is the same.

Just a technical difference in how the license works. Components can either use the CS3 serial number or their own serial number, so they are letting you go either way.

 

[137489]

But wait...can't any Adobe Acrobat do this (and Macs)? Is there a difference between printing and capturing?

in working with past versions on the Windows side, printing causes larger file sizes than just a direct export.

 

[Westside guy]

This is getting ridiculous. Not just that Adobe is doing their best to accelerate how fast they suck money out of their customers; but also the stupid software overlap. It's almost like the new Design Premium is becoming a superset of Web Premium - so why have two different sets?

Eventually they'll probably just offer the Master Collection, and you'll either buy that or go without. Soon afterward, their licensing terms will change so your software "purchase" is only good for a 2 year period, after which it'll stop working (so you're forced to keep buying the Master Collection, over and over).

 

[kitki83]

This seems to me like an update rather than new version of the same program which to me seems unfair to pay for it. I know there are subtle differences but we as techno-geeks are use to getting free updates and this company to me seems to take advatage of this. Also whats the purpose if Cs4 is coming out. Why spend more money on 3.3 if I wait for cs4. I don't understand the logic.


Edit.
WHO EVER RECOMMENDED PAPARAZZI, YOU ARE A GOD!!! It even saves as text not just image of text. Omg no more saving MAF files THANK YOU

 

[Analog Kid]

I'm worried about Adobe... Squeezing another $160 from their customers for something this minor sounds like they're really stretching to bring in cash.

Ok, so the Design Premium folks get Fireworks too but everyone else?

 

[SFVCyclone]

- Ability to check PDF standards compliance???

Or how about this one, - Ability to check PDF standards compliance. This is already in there in the preflight panel. They are for sure trying to make money out of nothing.

 

[Swift]

How's the plugin?

I really don't need Acrobat or anything it can do. On the rare occasion that I need to fill out a pdf form, Acrobat Reader does a fine job.

Why exactly do you need to embed a movie in a pdf?

What's far more important to me is the nonobtrusive way that Preview just opens the damn pdf in the blink of an eye. I no longer have to wait for the Frankenstein Adobe menu to implant itself in the browser and sl-ow-w-ly open the file, only to realize I don't need that page.

 

[137489]

Don't get it.



I don't get it, with all the software out there that supports PDF exportation these days - why do we need this? Even Microsoft Office 2007 has a download for publishing to PDF (but it does not support the books marks to jump to specific pages). Capturing webpages as one huge page instead of printing that breaks into pages could be nice - but what happens when you print. Do you lose text? sometimes I have a problem with word losing text if it goes beyond the margins, or outside of the printable area. It just does not go to the next page.....

Also

"- Insert video (FLV or H.264) into PDF. Video can be marked up."

So now our PDF documents can have video? am I confused about something here? Yes, this could be nice to imbed a video advertisement or a video that further depicts a topic or gives working examples of something in the document (this could be cool for technical documents). But seriously - embedding video increases file sizes. the whole point of PDF is to allow for small file sizes that most everyone can read (there are alot of PDF viewers out there). Now if my PDF has a Video? Does this mean I need to worry if I have the right FLV player loaded - or does the PDF now take care of playing the video if I do not have flash on my PC? Especially since the iphone does not support flash.

I guess i should take a look at Adobe's website (heck I still use Acrobat 5 for creating PDF's when I need to print to the distiller on my Windows machines - everywhere else I have either a freebie or plugin).

Also, Adobe is getting way expensive.....

 

[atari1356]

Edit.
WHO EVER RECOMMENDED PAPARAZZI, YOU ARE A GOD!!! It even saves as text not just image of text. Omg no more saving MAF files THANK YOU

And the links within the PDF's it creates are clickable too.

Also, you can type a URL in your web browser's address bar to tell Paparazzi to capture it, like this:

paparazzi:https://www.macrumors.com/

 

[macnews]

I think Adobe is pushing this out with no real meaningful upgrades. When you consider how recently CS3 was released, bring out CS4 so quickly afterwards is likely to cause a big backlash. Then you bring in the other problems like feature parity issues between Win and Mac, I wonder what Adobe is thinking.

 

[7on]

Since when do you need a video in a PDF? PDF is suppose to be a print standard, and until I can print videos I don't think flash should be embedded.

 

[137489]

Stinks

So, as it stand now, anyone who gets this and imbeds videos - my PDF viewer apps (like preview) won't be able to open the file or if it does; there is no guarantee it will open it correctly.

I agree with the person who said Adobe reader is slow. My "other viewers " opens them quickly and Apple preview is snappy as anything to open a large badly formatted PDF that is 100's of megebytes.


I also found another stink factor. Because Adobe kinda stanked as compared to the other PDF creators (price alone) - I have not upgraded since Adobe Acrobat 5. there had been no new features I really needed. In fact I only bought 5 because at the time, it was the only way to create PDF's. this upgrade left out those who are still using version 5 as it only upgrades, 6, 7, 8. so I would have to pay $500? Just for what? to be able to put a video in my file? And it does not answer if the video player is completely imbeded within the PDF, so that jo shmo that has a free PDF viewer can't read my PDF's?

Also, what about all the apps that import PDF's into their apps. What will happen with the Video segment?

 

[skellener]

Yes. Printing splits it into pages, and it looks terrible. Capturing makes a PDF that looks exactly like the website.

In OS X if you create a custom size in page set up (35", 45" whatever) and then print to PDF (or Preview) you will see one long giant page.

 

[137489]

Acrobat reader 9 not available for download

Adobe's website does not have acrobat reader 9 available for download, yet there comparson charts show the difference between all the 9 versions including reader 9?

I guess 8.12 plus the media player will read adobe 9 formats?

What gives - give us something to create a document but for no way for other to view it?



Download the latest version of Adobe Reader

Adobe Reader 8.1.2Adobe Reader
Windows XP, English (IO also checked - mac is the same version 8.1.2)

Different language or operating system?
22.4MB (file sizes vary between windows, mac intel, and may ppc)

Learn more | System Requirements | License | Distribute Adobe Reader





Also install:


Free Google Toolbar (optional)




Search Google from any web page, block pop-ups

Learn more | Privacy policy | License



Also install:


Adobe Media Player

Learn more
13.8MB





Download now

By clicking the Download button you agree to the License Agreements and Privacy Policies for the software included.
Total file size: 36.2MB

 

[pizzacake]

In OS X if you create a custom size in page set up (35", 45" whatever) and then print to PDF (or Preview) you will see one long giant page.

This is what I do. I have some custom sizes set up 25cmx50cm,25cmx100cm,25cmx150cm etc. In Leopard you get a preview of how it will look as well.

 

[MindBrain]

Charging for an update? Does anyone know if this fixes bugs under Leopard?

 

[137489]

Since when do you need a video in a PDF? PDF is suppose to be a print standard, and until I can print videos I don't think flash should be embedded.

Yes. My old Acrobt 5 I still use says "e-paper solutions" right on the start up splash.

With the world moving to a paperless environment (YEP -like that will totally happen at 100% in my great-great grandchildren's lifetime ), and the fact more people get their news through other media than paper. I can see why this would be useful, but at the same time it kinda goes against the fact of making an easy to exchange format for everybody. If there was a standard video format we would have one. as of right now there is:

MP4
AIF
WMV
MPG
SWF
FLV
MOV
AVI
VOB
and probably a couple of others.

So does this mean that everyone who buys adobe acrobat will also get a free flash creator to use this feature? Oh wait this is adobe where nothing is free

Personally, Macromedia was better until adobe got their hands on them.

 

[e-coli]

You've been able to put videos into PDF's with acrobat since version 5! My portfolio was done this way in 2002.

Craziness. I see no benefit to this. Acrobat is bloatware. Hard-selling "new" features that are already there...that's just evil.

Adobe = M$

 

[Virgil-TB2]

... Adobe has announced the availability of Adobe Acrobat 9

Yawn.

Does anyone even use Acrobat anymore?

It's been many years since I had a use for it, and at my University the only copies we have in operation are one on the scanner (for the occasional student needing to make a PDF), and one each on the desktop of all the um, ... "slower" secretaries in the department.

I can't even remember the last time I used Acrobat *reader* let alone the full app. If Adobe hadn't kept such a tight grip on PDF creation over the years, no one would need or use Acrobat at all. It's so badly coded it's almost useless and many other programs do similar things better and could completely replace the functionality of Acrobat overnight if they were legally allowed to.

Here's a thought Adobe ... how about making good software instead of relying only on monopolistic practices, copyrights and legal agreements to sell your products and keep your customers?

 

[telecomm]

You've been able to put videos into PDF's with acrobat since version 5! My portfolio was done this way in 2002.

Yeah, this seems lost on everyone. It's pretty incredible Adobe can claim this is a new feature. (Although the ability to embed Flash was recently broken in Pro 8 + Leopard, and has yet to be fixed.)

 

[patseguin]

I think upgrading CS3 to CS3.3 is exactly the same thing as getting the Acrobat 9 update. So the price is the same.

Just a technical difference in how the license works. Components can either use the CS3 serial number or their own serial number, so they are letting you go either way.

This is exactly right. I just purchased the "CS3.3 Upgrade" and all it was was a donwload of Acrobat 9 Pro. Kinda false advertising as I was expecting new released of the other programs in the suite.

 

[motulist]

Printing splits it into pages, and it looks terrible. Capturing makes a PDF that looks exactly like the website.

You could probably just create a custom paper size that's a few feet long and then it'll probably save your print-to-pdf files as one continuous PDF document.

 

[puckhead193]

wait i have to pay for a minor update... what a load of crap. I'll def. be skipping this update. I shell out all this money for CS3 and now they want more for a minor update for one app

 

[telecomm]

Yawn.

Does anyone even use Acrobat anymore?

It is a really minor update, but to be fair, there are lots of reasons people might need to use Acrobat. For the average home user there's probably not much use for it, but the average home user probably isn't involved in publishing, and probably doesn't create forms, participate in collaborative reviewing processes, etc.