<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Tristan Watkins on IT Infrastructure &#187; Adobe Archive</title>
	<atom:link href="http://tristanwatkins.com/index.php/tag/adobe/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://tristanwatkins.com</link>
	<description>Technical guidance for SharePoint, Cloud Services, Windows and more</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 21 Oct 2011 23:33:55 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.4</generator>
		<item>
		<title>PDF iFilter performance benchmarks, in which FoxIt performs nearly 40x better than Adobe</title>
		<link>http://tristanwatkins.com/index.php/pdf-ifilter-performance-benchmarks-in-which-foxit-performs-nearly-40x-better-than-adobe/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=pdf-ifilter-performance-benchmarks-in-which-foxit-performs-nearly-40x-better-than-adobe</link>
		<comments>http://tristanwatkins.com/index.php/pdf-ifilter-performance-benchmarks-in-which-foxit-performs-nearly-40x-better-than-adobe/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Feb 2010 01:49:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tristan Watkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Performance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SharePoint]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Adobe]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CPU]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Crawl]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FoxIt]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[iFilter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Index]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PDF]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Search]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SharePoint 2010]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TET]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tristanwatkins.com/?p=858</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#8217;m not usually keen on re-posting other blog entries here, but I think this is quite important. Jie Li from Microsoft has been releasing some good guidance on SharePoint 2010 recently. In his most recent posts he&#8217;s been looking at FoxIt&#8217;s PDF iFilter 2.0 and comparing performance against TET and Adobe. Both TET and FoxIt are [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m not usually keen on re-posting other blog entries here, but I think this is quite important. <a href="http://blogs.msdn.com/opal/default.aspx">Jie Li</a> from Microsoft  has been releasing some good guidance on SharePoint 2010 recently. In his most  recent posts he&#8217;s been looking at FoxIt&#8217;s PDF iFilter 2.0 and comparing  performance against TET and Adobe. Both TET and FoxIt are optimised for  multicore processors while Adobe will only use a single CPU. This has massive  performance implications. In his tests <strong>a full crawl too 13 minutes with  FoxIt</strong> versus <strong>8 hours+ with Adobe</strong>.<strong></strong> <a href="http://blogs.msdn.com/opal/archive/2010/02/09/pdf-ifilter-test-with-sharepoint-2010.aspx">http://blogs.msdn.com/opal/archive/2010/02/09/pdf-ifilter-test-with-sharepoint-2010.aspx</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://tristanwatkins.com/index.php/pdf-ifilter-performance-benchmarks-in-which-foxit-performs-nearly-40x-better-than-adobe/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The search for a good Acrobat Reader alternative</title>
		<link>http://tristanwatkins.com/index.php/the-search-for-a-good-acrobat-reader-alternative/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=the-search-for-a-good-acrobat-reader-alternative</link>
		<comments>http://tristanwatkins.com/index.php/the-search-for-a-good-acrobat-reader-alternative/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Sep 2009 22:56:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tristan Watkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Client applications]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Acrobat Reader]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Adobe]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Foobar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FoxIt]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MuPDF]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PDF]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PDF-XChange]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sumatra]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tristanwatkins.com/?p=154</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Back in April, Slashdot pointed me to a C-Net article in which F-Secure&#8217;s chief research officer recommended moving away from Adobe Acrobat Reader. Personally, I needed little incentive. I&#8217;ve disliked Acrobat Reader fairly intensely for some time and I&#8217;d already moved to FoxIt Reader.  Acrobat Reader is massive, it constantly prompts for updates and evidently it doesn&#8217;t [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Back in April, <a title="SlashDot" href="http://news.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/04/22/222237" target="_blank">Slashdot</a> pointed me to a <a title="C-Net" href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-10224449-83.html" target="_blank">C-Net article</a> in which F-Secure&#8217;s chief research officer recommended moving away from Adobe Acrobat Reader. Personally, I needed little incentive. I&#8217;ve disliked Acrobat Reader fairly intensely for some time and I&#8217;d already moved to <a title="FoxIt Reader" href="http://www.foxitsoftware.com/pdf/reader/" target="_blank">FoxIt Reader</a>.  Acrobat Reader is massive, it constantly prompts for updates and evidently it doesn&#8217;t prompt for update enough, given the number of holes that have recently been revelaed.</p>
<p>I thought FoxIt was a good alternative for the first year or so that I was using it, but (like an adolescent) as it matured some things about it started to annoy me and I thought it was worth trying out some of the alternatives on the market. Of the Windows options from the <a title="PDF Readers dot org" href="http://pdfreaders.org/" target="_blank">F-Secure recommendation</a>, I didn&#8217;t get very far with Okular or Yap but I spent a good deal of time with <a title="Sumatra" href="http://blog.kowalczyk.info/software/sumatrapdf/index.html" target="_blank">Sumatra</a> at work and <a title="MuPDF" href="http://ccxvii.net/mupdf/" target="_blank">MuPDF</a> with the <a title="MuPDF plugin" href="http://ccxvii.net/mupdf/plugin/install.html" target="_blank">plugin for Firefox</a> at home. I wasn&#8217;t unhappy with either of these options, as my PDF reader requirements are very basic. I love that Sumatra can be run without installing anything and is small enough to carry around on a memory stick. No more PDF readers on servers&#8230; However, after inflicting Sumatra on some unwitting recipients, I decided to find a heftier alternative, as they need more than up, down and zoom.</p>
<p>Enter: <a title="PDFXChange" href="http://www.docu-track.com/home/prod_user/PDF-XChange_Tools/pdfx_viewer/" target="_blank">DocuTrack&#8217;s PDF-XChange Viewer</a>. It&#8217;s got loads of features, is reasonably lightweight and does the job in every way that I&#8217;ve put it to the test. The only thing that irritates me is the size and number of toolbars running by default, but they&#8217;re easy enough to turn off. Admittedly my needs are few, but I&#8217;ve not had any other complaints about it since pushing it to about 20 other people. If you fancy taking the plunge and take me up on any of these suggestions, I&#8217;d love to hear feedback, as I&#8217;m discovering that it&#8217;s nearly as divisive as the media player question. <a title="Foobar 2000" href="http://www.foobar2000.org/" target="_blank">I &lt;3 Foobar</a>, for the record.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://tristanwatkins.com/index.php/the-search-for-a-good-acrobat-reader-alternative/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

