Comments on: Foxit Reader 2.0 a lightweight PDF Reader

By: OAlexander

OAlexander — Sat, 25 Apr 2009 16:12:40 +0000

For testing purposes I use a free map of Rio de Janeiro by Weller (http://www.mapmatrix.com/tmhtm/htmtm/18101.html / ~ 1 MB / other maps available), which has some degree of difficulty to display. PDF-XChange Viewer handles it far superior. Foxit has to redraw after each movement when displaying, say at 100%. PDF-Xchange is smooth as cream. It also has more features. I recommend everybody to find a free Version 2.0 of PDF-XChange Viewer.

By: Martin Musatov

Martin Musatov — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 01:43:20 +0000

Very true indeed! Good exchange guys.

I am using Sumatra Beta and while I appreciate the taught corners the selecting text was also an issue with me. Back to the Fox!

By: Adobe Reader 9.1 Lite

Adobe Reader 9.1 Lite — Fri, 03 Apr 2009 09:58:27 +0000

[...] Software programs usually grow with every release. Some of the remarkable products that made it from a tiny resource friendly application are Nero Burning Rom and Adobe Reader. Users who are fed up with those overweight programs usually flock to third party applications that provide a balance between resource usage and functionality. An alternatives for Adobe Reader is for example the popular pdf reader Foxit Reader. [...]

By: Prana

Prana — Sat, 28 Mar 2009 07:09:34 +0000

Based on the comments above, i downloaded the Foxit reader. As a student, i read up a lot of management eBooks. Most of them are PDFs and what is with reading a book when you cant hightlight text or do what you would to a real book. Adobe is just the level-one and once anyone goes ahead to use pdfs as virtual books, one needs something like Foxit.

By: Oliver Alexander

Oliver Alexander — Fri, 11 Aug 2006 18:21:42 +0000

Foxit Reader is indeed very fast and seems to be operating more fluent, with less fuss. Nevertheless, two minor, resolvable, issues:

1. The toolbar tends to want to align itself in two rows. Alleviate this by disabling the “Help” Bar item, and moving the unremovable “Typewriter” icon not just up, but a position or two back.

2. The colorful advertisement on the menubar tends to clash with my general colour scheme, and I am not in the market for the rest of their product range. Simply grab “ResHack”er and delete the abaout half a dozen bitmaps in the file, and they are roger over and done with.

Cheers.

By: Martin

Martin — Mon, 17 Jul 2006 20:06:18 +0000

I agree, I want my programs small, fast and efficient. I don´t need all those gimmicks I´d never use anyway. I stick with winamp light all the time, no need for all those skinning and video stuff.

I uninstalled adobe reader, could not stand it anymore waiting for that thing to open..

By: Hornswaggled

Hornswaggled — Mon, 17 Jul 2006 18:40:56 +0000

I cant agree more. Adobe reader should do just that read! I remember working when i worked for a large bank and had an old box (computer). When they updated the software to adobe 6.0 the thing would CRAWL when opening any pdf. At the time i had to open probably 30 pdf’s per day and they all took at least 1-2 minutes to open. Such a waste of time.

I dont understand all the bloated software thats out there. More stuff doesnt mean more good. Winamp grew becuase it loaded fast and worked, now aol has its hands in it and its starting to suck.

Anyone else think simple and quick is best? Well id do