Adobe Acrobat 7 Pro: CD / Download
-
@StrongBad said:
@technobabble said:
@ajstringham said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@ajstringham said:
It's often more editing internal documents that are in PDF format but not available in DOC, DOCX, etc.
Why would internal documents not have the originals? Sounds like spending money to fix a basic workflow problem.
It happens. I see it all the time. Also, Acrobat lets you fill in PDFs and create fillable forms with Acrobat and LiveCycle Designer. That's the biggest thing most people mean by "editing" PDFs.
Is there another choice for this? I too see this a lot.
Moving off of PDF fixes this completely. That is always an option. PDF is not a format designed to be edited. Word, for example, is a better tool for editing files.
If you have a document that legitimately needs to be edited repeatedly, PDF is not a good choice. Leave it as a DOC or DOCX. PDFs are forms. But as it's been said, creating fillable PDFs for clients, etc is often what people need Acrobat for.
-
@ajstringham said:
@technobabble said:
@ajstringham said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@ajstringham said:
It's often more editing internal documents that are in PDF format but not available in DOC, DOCX, etc.
Why would internal documents not have the originals? Sounds like spending money to fix a basic workflow problem.
It happens. I see it all the time. Also, Acrobat lets you fill in PDFs and create fillable forms with Acrobat and LiveCycle Designer. That's the biggest thing most people mean by "editing" PDFs.
Is there another choice for this? I too see this a lot.
As I said, I know Foxit has a similar suite to Adobe but I don't have any real personal experience with it. Adobe is the business standard, and Acrobat Standard is fine for most people.
Actually I meant changing the way people use software, not the software it's self. You don't need a F450 to do the work of a Ford Ranger. Hell sometimes a car makes more sense than a freaking truck. Might be bad analogies, but you should understand what I am trying to say.
-
@technobabble said:
@ajstringham said:
@technobabble said:
@ajstringham said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@ajstringham said:
It's often more editing internal documents that are in PDF format but not available in DOC, DOCX, etc.
Why would internal documents not have the originals? Sounds like spending money to fix a basic workflow problem.
It happens. I see it all the time. Also, Acrobat lets you fill in PDFs and create fillable forms with Acrobat and LiveCycle Designer. That's the biggest thing most people mean by "editing" PDFs.
Is there another choice for this? I too see this a lot.
As I said, I know Foxit has a similar suite to Adobe but I don't have any real personal experience with it. Adobe is the business standard, and Acrobat Standard is fine for most people.
Actually I meant changing the way people use software, not the software it's self. You don't need a F450 to do the work of a Ford Ranger. Hell sometimes a car makes more sense than a freaking truck. Might be bad analogies, but you should understand what I am trying to say.
Not sure what you mean by changing the way people use software. How would you change this?
-
@ajstringham said:
@technobabble said:
@ajstringham said:
@technobabble said:
@ajstringham said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@ajstringham said:
It's often more editing internal documents that are in PDF format but not available in DOC, DOCX, etc.
Why would internal documents not have the originals? Sounds like spending money to fix a basic workflow problem.
It happens. I see it all the time. Also, Acrobat lets you fill in PDFs and create fillable forms with Acrobat and LiveCycle Designer. That's the biggest thing most people mean by "editing" PDFs.
Is there another choice for this? I too see this a lot.
As I said, I know Foxit has a similar suite to Adobe but I don't have any real personal experience with it. Adobe is the business standard, and Acrobat Standard is fine for most people.
Actually I meant changing the way people use software, not the software it's self. You don't need a F450 to do the work of a Ford Ranger. Hell sometimes a car makes more sense than a freaking truck. Might be bad analogies, but you should understand what I am trying to say.
Not sure what you mean by changing the way people use software. How would you change this?
Crap...I meant changing what they use for software...Not everything has to be made in Acrobat!
-
@technobabble said:
@ajstringham said:
@technobabble said:
@ajstringham said:
@technobabble said:
@ajstringham said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@ajstringham said:
It's often more editing internal documents that are in PDF format but not available in DOC, DOCX, etc.
Why would internal documents not have the originals? Sounds like spending money to fix a basic workflow problem.
It happens. I see it all the time. Also, Acrobat lets you fill in PDFs and create fillable forms with Acrobat and LiveCycle Designer. That's the biggest thing most people mean by "editing" PDFs.
Is there another choice for this? I too see this a lot.
As I said, I know Foxit has a similar suite to Adobe but I don't have any real personal experience with it. Adobe is the business standard, and Acrobat Standard is fine for most people.
Actually I meant changing the way people use software, not the software it's self. You don't need a F450 to do the work of a Ford Ranger. Hell sometimes a car makes more sense than a freaking truck. Might be bad analogies, but you should understand what I am trying to say.
Not sure what you mean by changing the way people use software. How would you change this?
Crap...I meant changing what they use for software...Not everything has to be made in Acrobat!
I agree. However, the time and hassle to re-train users has to be weighed against the cost of continuing to use whatever. I'd bet it's probably still cheaper to stick to Acrobat.
-
@technobabble said:
Crap...I meant changing what they use for software...Not everything has to be made in Acrobat!
That was what I was saying. MS Word or even LibreOffice will do this better. They probably already have word and are just opening the wrong application because they are given it, so why not?
-
@ajstringham said:
I agree. However, the time and hassle to re-train users has to be weighed against the cost of continuing to use whatever. I'd bet it's probably still cheaper to stick to Acrobat.
Few people know how to use Acrobat and not Word. And retraining is a one time expense, using the wrong software requires constant bad training and extra cost for forever.
-
@StrongBad said:
@ajstringham said:
I agree. However, the time and hassle to re-train users has to be weighed against the cost of continuing to use whatever. I'd bet it's probably still cheaper to stick to Acrobat.
Few people know how to use Acrobat and not Word. And retraining is a one time expense, using the wrong software requires constant bad training and extra cost for forever.
You always generate the initial form in Word. However, making it so you can check boxes, select radio buttons, limit certain fields to certain input types, etc is all Acrobat.
-
InfoPath provides form functionality in the MS Office suite.
-
@StrongBad said:
InfoPath provides form functionality in the MS Office suite.
Never used it honestly.
-
@ajstringham said:
You always generate the initial form in Word. However, making it so you can check boxes, select radio buttons, limit certain fields to certain input types, etc is all Acrobat.
I think you need to spend more time with Word. How to Create a Fillable Form in Word. Word was doing this before PDF was widely available. Word was the traditional tool for this.
-
@StrongBad said:
@ajstringham said:
You always generate the initial form in Word. However, making it so you can check boxes, select radio buttons, limit certain fields to certain input types, etc is all Acrobat.
I think you need to spend more time with Word. How to Create a Fillable Form in Word. Word was doing this before PDF was widely available. Word was the traditional tool for this.
The fact is, though, that forms have the standard of being in the PDF format. As a rule, if I get a form as a Word doc, I look at it as kind of unprofessional.
-
@ajstringham that is an odd reaction. Why would you feel that way?
-
Wait, if you get forms in Word, how did you not know that they exist?
-
@StrongBad said:
Wait, if you get forms in Word, how did you not know that they exist?
I'm saying you generally create the form in Word. You put the check boxes, blank fields, etc all in Word. However, you make them fillable and customize that fillable-ness in Acrobat.
-
@StrongBad said:
@ajstringham that is an odd reaction. Why would you feel that way?
Because forms are, by standard, in PDF.
-
@ajstringham said:
I'm saying you generally create the form in Word. You put the check boxes, blank fields, etc all in Word. However, you make them fillable and customize that fillable-ness in Acrobat.
Because, typically, you like to do things poorly? Why would you use one tool to do what it is good at and then convert to another format, that requires more cost, and isn't as good at what you are trying to do? Why would you do that?
-
@ajstringham said:
Because forms are, by standard, in PDF.
Because users are idiots, sure. But why would you encourage such a thing? It just makes people look uninformed. It doesn't reflect well on people to show that they are spending money unwisely.
-
@StrongBad said:
@ajstringham said:
I'm saying you generally create the form in Word. You put the check boxes, blank fields, etc all in Word. However, you make them fillable and customize that fillable-ness in Acrobat.
Because, typically, you like to do things poorly? Why would you use one tool to do what it is good at and then convert to another format, that requires more cost, and isn't as good at what you are trying to do? Why would you do that?
A PDF with fillable forms is more locked down. People can't, as a rule, change the wording of the forms, etc. All they can do is fill-in fields that have been marked as fillable. Can you do that with Word?
-
@ajstringham said:
A PDF with fillable forms is more locked down. People can't, as a rule, change the wording of the forms, etc. All they can do is fill-in fields that have been marked as fillable. Can you do that with Word?
Of course. Why would you assume otherwise?
