From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.comp.tex.context/10315 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Matthew Huggett Newsgroups: gmane.comp.tex.context Subject: Re: pdf viewers Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 19:00:49 +0900 Sender: ntg-context-admin@ntg.nl Message-ID: <3E23DFD1.6040702@zam.att.ne.jp> References: <5.1.0.14.1.20030113092921.00b13258@server-1> <200301132159.03745.john@wexfordpress.com> <20030114034423.GA239@ext.canterbury.ac.nz> Reply-To: ntg-context@ntg.nl NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1042538463 24728 80.91.224.249 (14 Jan 2003 10:01:03 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 10:01:03 +0000 (UTC) Return-path: Original-Received: from ref.vet.uu.nl ([131.211.172.13] helo=ref.ntg.nl) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 18YNsS-0006QQ-00 for ; Tue, 14 Jan 2003 11:01:00 +0100 Original-Received: from ref.ntg.nl (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by ref.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3E1410AF7; Tue, 14 Jan 2003 11:02:16 +0100 (MET) Original-Received: from smtp1.att.ne.jp (smtp1.att.ne.jp [165.76.15.137]) by ref.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48E3E10AE8 for ; Tue, 14 Jan 2003 11:01:04 +0100 (MET) Original-Received: from zam.att.ne.jp (unknown [218.231.154.26]) by smtp1.att.ne.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BB7F15981 for ; Tue, 14 Jan 2003 19:01:01 +0900 (JST) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20021003 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en Original-To: ntg-context@ntg.nl Errors-To: ntg-context-admin@ntg.nl X-BeenThere: ntg-context@ntg.nl X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: mailing list for ConTeXt users List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.comp.tex.context:10315 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.comp.tex.context:10315 The main reason I was asking about pdf viewers in the first place is that both Xpdf and Acrobat 5.* (Linux) seem to load pages much more slowly than Acrobat under Windows. Xpdf is just rediculous. And Acrobat is slow with large files like our beloved ConTeXt manuals. I've changed my preference from pdf to ps because GGV is so much better (IMHO) than the available pdf viewers and I hardly ever write interactive documents. Richard Mahoney wrote: >On Mon, Jan 13, 2003 at 09:59:03PM +0000, John Culleton wrote: > > >>On Monday 13 January 2003 08:30, Hans Hagen wrote: >> >> >>>At 01:49 PM 1/13/2003 +0900, you wrote: >>>[btw, is acrobat that bad under linux? runs ok >>>here (vmware+suse on win2k) >>> >>> >>> >>Acrobat Reader under Linux is limited to Version 4. On Windows you get >>Version 5 which has more bells and whistles. But I use ver. 4 all the >>time. >> >> > >contra! > >I'm using the following on a FreeBSD box under Linux `emulation': > > acroread-5.06_1 = up-to-date with port > >If I recall correctly its much faster than 4* > > >Regards, > > Richard Mahoney > > > >