[david7]

I updated from Adobe Reader 8.1.2 to Reader 9. The process added Acrobat.com and adobeAIR (installer?) to my computer. They don't take up much room, but is there any reason to keep these? Uninstalling them won't effect the Reader 9, will it?

PS: As opposed to 8.1.2, which took up 84.7 MB of space on my computer, the Adobe web site says that Reader 9 only takes of 33.5 MB of space. But my computer says that it takes up 202 MB. What's up with that? (I note that some of you guys dismiss Adobe as bloatware and prefer Foxit.)

[coastie65]

Hi David, I guess it is an individule preference, but I usually end up dumping the extra stuff over time. A lot of members don't like Adobe due to Security issues. coastie

[techie4fun]

david7 said:

I updated from Adobe Reader 8.1.2 to Reader 9. The process added Acrobat.com and adobeAIR (installer?) to my computer. They don't take up much room, but is there any reason to keep these? Uninstalling them won't effect the Reader 9, will it?

Hi and welcome to PC World.

No, they shouldn't. These are sorta like extra (not needed) things that come after you've already installed something from the company . You should be fine uninstalling whatever extra was loaded.

[lilxkid24]

Adobe reader is crap, its bloated like hell and its slow. Foxit reader loads faster than Adobe and it only takes like 6.6mb on your hdd space big difference with adobe reader 9.

[david7]

Thanks for your respnse.

You seem to have some company in your opinion. I'll probably uninstall Adobe and try Foxit.

[david7]

Thanks for your response. Merry Christmas.

[david7]

Thanks for your response. Merry Christmas.

[Adama]

Hi David,

A few weeks ago I installed Adobe Reader 9. Then I made the mistake of uninstalling some of the stuff and then I kept getting black screens, couldn't use my computer.

So, I was finally able to uninstall it, then reinstalled it again. Lastly, I put some of the extra stuff in an Unused Desktop Folder in my Desktop, and I just left them alone... no more problems since I did that.

[SpiritWind]

Hi David :



It is recommended NOT to use the malware-prone Adobe Reader . Recently , Researchers found a new hackertoolkit that uses nothing but Adobe securityleaks in order to infect systems. "PDF Xploit Pack" ( www.trustedsource.org/blog/153/Rise-Of-The-PDF-Exploits )adds all kind of exploits to PDF-files. When a certain exploit has successfully infected the OS, the IP address is sent to the attackers, so they need to try again. This to reduce the time it takes to manage the bots.
Use of PDF-files is becoming more and more popular among malcreants, this because other toolkits also have PDF exploits now. A year ago only 3% of the exploits were PDF directed.

So as an Alternative to this Adobe product, consider the FREE "Foxit Reader" or

"CutePDF" .

[david7]

A belated thanks for your answer.
The Foxit reader seems to have clear advantages over the Adobe reader. Like I tell Adama, according to my control panel, Adobe 8.1.3 takes up 84.8, Adobe 9 takes up 202 and Foxit takes up a mere 7.93. It seems to me that, if you are running Vista on a computer with 2GB of RAM or less, you want to save space where ever you can. Therefore, you are better off with Foxit.

[david7]

A belated thanks for your response.
I'm curious as to why you stick with the Adobe reader when many of the other more experienced people (such as yourself) prefer the the Foxit reader. I conducted my own "scientific tests" which suggests that most people would be better off with Foxit. I went to the www.irs.gov and downloaded the 2 instruction booklets for form 1040. One is 161 pages and the other is 95 pages. Previously I tried this on my computer at work, an older one which is about to be replaced, and it took a long time (well, almost 60 seconds, which, in most contexts, isn't really that long.) Anyway, I downloaded the instructions using both Adobe and Foxit. I used a laptop with 2GB of RAM and one with 4GB of RAM. On both computers, both programs produced the instruction booklets in less than 2 seconds flat. So I "scientifically" conclude that they work equally well at normal tasks.

But, according to my control panel, Adobe 8.1.3 takes up 84.8, Adobe 9 takes up 202 and Foxit takes up a mere 7.93. It seems to me that, if you are running Vista on a computer with 2GB of RAM or less, you want to save space where ever you can. Therefore, unless you have unlimited RAM, you are better off with Foxit. And that's without considering the security concerns that some people have mentioned.

[number6]

I may be kind of late, but I also recommend Foxit Reader as a light weight PDF reader.

[Adama]

< shrugs >

Oh well... sometimes I do things that other people don't understand, like stick with Internet Explorer instead of using Firefox.

[coastie65]

Hey, What's to understand? I'm with IE myself. :D

[Adama]

Phew! What a relief! LOL :p

[Tech4me]

Adama. I still have IE7....and Adobe 9....Nothing wrong with that.....:p

[coastie65]

ME Too. !http://forums.pcworld.com/legacyimages/
1!

[Adama]

LOL Love your emo! :D

[mirone]

I use AR 9 and i'm satisfied with it. Working much faster than the old one. :)

[lilxkid24]

buttt foxit is much quickerrrrrr who doesn't want speed nowadays plus it takes like 95% less space than adobe