![]() The Adobe Acrobat community has the ability to reveal a portion of the webpage or multiple webpages in their entirety by merging them into one PDF. To print, review, and share a website, convert the desired webpages into PDF documents. Acrobat DC assures that by downloading or sharing a PDF, the content within will appear exactly like the original. Professionally convert Microsoft Office files and JPEG, PNG, and TIFF images into functional PDFs within Microsoft Word, Powerpoint, and Excel, consumers are able to edit PDFs that seamlessly open. What is possible with Adobe Acrobat Pro DC?Ĭreate PDFs with Adobe Acrobat by converting, scanning, splitting, and merging content. There are individual, team, and enterprise subscription plans which all ensure identity, data, and document security. I am periodically called upon to advise companies with hundreds of seats worth of licenses and, while Acrobat has continued to be my preference among the lot, "this company has policies that allow them to force you, by reducing functionality, to migrate any time they feel like it" is, to me, a fairly good reason for reviewing and changing software package selection decisions.Adobe offers a seven-day free trial at the conclusion of the trial, people can decide whether a monthly or annual commitment suits them. Others who feel the same way should consider going to "Help/Feedback" in Firefox and making similar comments and requests.Īs to Adobe and what are apparently "we may fix this in a future version" and what appears to be "in spite of the fact that your version is still officially supported, we don't promise to raise a finger to keep it working" policies, the market for PDF creation software is actually competitive. If one were inclined toward conspiracy theories, one might suggest that Adobe has been influenced by their long-time relationship with Microsoft to be trying to push people toward IE or Edge, but I've seen no real evidence of that or anything other than a lack of commitment to supporting the product across a wide range of environments.įwiw, I've written extensive feedback to Mozilla on the Firefox site more or less suggesting that, if they don't want people to face a choice between continuing to run important applications software (for which Firefox plug-ins are just an interface) and Firefox (which might lose), it is important that they provide, and support, "I trust this one, signature or not" capability on a per-plug-in basis (not just an option to disable all signature checking and a promise to remove that in the future. Again, AFAICT, all that is needed is for them to post a signed version of the plug-in - I can imagine its taking some time to revise procedures and tools to do that automatically with each update, but posting a signed version as an emergency patch should be easy if it is seen as a priority. ![]() I think Mozilla could have handled it better - e.g., by providing for exceptions for particular plug-ins rather than having only a "completely disable checking" option - but, again, complain to them rather than Adobe about that.Īs far as I can tell, all that is going on here is that Adobe, despite the acknowledgment over a week ago that "engineering is aware of the issue and working on it", doesn't care enough about non-online or SAAS versions of Acrobat to put the resources and energy into getting this fixed quickly. ![]() The change was announced months in advance. The requirement for plug-in signing is a legitimate security improvement, responding to a well-understood threat (not a fantasy one). However, this issue isn't any of those things. I've got some of the same concerns about updates, quality control, and the apparent effects of the supposedly non-profit Mozille foundation making deals with vendors, often for-profit ones, to promote particular products and create disadvantages for others. If you are dissatisfied with Firefox, complain to them or switch browsers.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |