![]() Meaning, that if Adobe changes something on it’s reader, your document most likely is not impacted in a negative manner. IMHO, in case of public document, one way to consider the skill of a producer is to find out how well he produces content that is NOT dependent on a very specific application, but instead attempts to ensure that as many people as possible is able to read the information.īy trying to produce as available content as possible also has such a benefit, that your content is not too tightly tied on the whims of an application and it’s developers. Yet, every visitor had to load the same data related to the function, and there was no certainty that the function would not stop working on later versions of IE (I think it did on some point), or that it would not break the page on later versions of any browser (including IE). But eventually, one person said it was nice, otherwise I didn’t hear any comments about it. It was totally pointless and irrelevant “eye-candy”, which point was to annoy IE users. Long, long ago, on my personal homepage on geocities, I put a “heart-shower” on the link-bar (burst of hearts that rained off the screen on click), and it worked only on IE. Nowhere was said that saving it would be very unwise, because the form requested for very personal information, and the form was supposed to be “fill, print and forget”. “Funny” though, I was able to save said document and the information I had added, because I wasn’t using Adobe Reader. (FYI, I’ve ran to such button, and out of “laziness” I tried to use it – but of course it didn’t work, because I wasn’t using Adobe Reader)Īnother example of misbehavior: I filled a form where was said that saving any added information was not possible. Seriously, how necessary is such a button, when user most likely is aware of “Print”-option in the menu – which has been there like forever, and is quite similar and/or in similar location in almost all applications? Real trouble begins, when such (most likely) unnecessary “features” causes crashes of, malfunctioning, or failures to create proper appearance for the (non-Adobe) reader. (For comparison, would you really want to produce a website that’s available only for IE users, just because you want to include a function to it that’s propably not necessary, or “easier” to produce with a certain piece of code?)Īs an example, I bet there’s countless amount of PDF-files where is included “Print”-button straight on the document, which works only on Adobe Reader. I would say, that instead of forcing users to use certain product just because you don’t want to produce fancy content that’s supposed to work equally on every viewer, business admins (and all other equals) should produce as minimal content as possible to ensure that it works for everyone, regardless of their viewer. “a lot of us business admins can’t just switch to low_featured_alternative without breaking a lot of things and upping our support load (why can’t I open this PDF?!?!?).” This entry was posted on Tuesday 6th of December 2011 03:18 PM The latest version, 5.1.3, is available from this link. 8, 3:02 p.m., ET: As one commenter has already noted, Foxit has released a security update for its reader. It also never hurts to consider one of several free PDF reader alternatives to Adobe, including Foxit, PDF-Xchange Viewer, Nitro PDF and Sumatra PDF. If you are using Adobe Reader or Acrobat, take a moment to make sure you have the latest version. Adobe’s Brad Arkin explains more about the company’s reasoning behind this decision in a blog post published along with the advisory. 10, 2012, the date of its next scheduled quarterly security update. ![]() Citing protections built into newer versions of its software, however, Adobe said it would not fix the flaw in Reader X or Acrobat X versions for Windows, Mac, or UNIX versions until Jan. A security bulletin warns of reports that the vulnerability is being actively exploited in “limited, targeted attacks in the wild against Adobe Reader 9.x on Windows.”Īdobe said it plans to ship an emergency update to address the vulnerability in Reader 9.x and Acrobat 9.x on Windows no later than the week of Dec. Malicious hackers are targeting a previously unknown security hole in Adobe Reader and Acrobat to compromise Microsoft Windows machines, Adobe warned today.Īdobe says attackers are taking advantage of a newly discovered critical flaw that exists in Adobe Reader X ( 10.1.1) and earlier versions for Windows and Mac systems, and Adobe Reader 9.4.6 and earlier 9.x versions for UNIX, as well as Adobe Acrobat X ( 10.1.1) and earlier for Windows and Mac machines.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |