RMS, Free software and the Ubuntu CDs

[Russell Davie]

On Sun, 02 Jul 2006 13:43:03 +0200
Alexander Skwar <listen at alexander.skwar.name> wrote:

> Alan McKinnon wrote:
> > On Sun, 2006-07-02 at 11:09 +0200, Alexander Skwar wrote:
> >> > I do get your meaning - compare evince to acroread for a good
> >> example.
> >> 
> >> You mean, for an example where the commercial program is very much
> >> crappy or doesn't add anything in comparison to the FLOSS solution?
> >> So you wanted to give an example which contradicts what Michael
> >> wrote?
> > 
> > No, I mean more like missing functionality in evince.
> 
> Aha. As far as I'm concerned, Acroread doesn't add any features. At
> least I don't know of any.

Acroread can read comments edited into pdf whereas evince acknowledges the comments, but can't read them.
using acroread 7.0.5-0.3, evince/dapper uptodate 0.5.2-0ubuntu3

I know, coz I send assignments in pdf to lecturer which is read and comments added in Acro-something in W'Doz and then its returned to me.
Which makes acroread v7.x more useful for me than evince. Previously I would have to use wine/cx-office to run acrobat to read the comments.
If you like I can send an assignment that has been marked.
Maybe you can get evince to read the comments.

>
> 
> > evince
> > loads way faster than acroread,
> 
> *WAY*. Sometimes it takes about 1 minute to fire up acroread on
> my machine - and I don't have a slow machine. Evince is there in
> a matter of seconds.

I concur, evince is heaps faster than acroread.

- R