RE: [Violation] Annotations were found inside the BleedBox, TrimBox or ArtBox on the following pages and PDFX/1-a standard

[Dov Isaacs]

Yes, Jacob and his company does have a workaround. I unfortunately forgot about 
it.
Nonetheless, it is a workaround hack and it doesn't change the fact that 
Framemaker
does not yet currently have a fully and/or properly functioning method of 
getting
proper DeviceCMYK printing or PDF exactly matching any and all CMYK values 
specified
in FrameMaker or any non-EPS CMYK content placed therein.

- Dov

 -Original Message-
 From: Jacob Schäffer [mailto:j...@grafikhuset.dk]
 Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2011 12:03 PM
 To: Dov Isaacs; framers@lists.frameusers.com
 Subject: SV: [Violation] Annotations were found inside the BleedBox, TrimBox 
 or ArtBox on the
 following pages and PDFX/1-a standard
 
 Dov said:
  The only workaround is to use Distiller settings to convert the RGB to
 CMYK, a somewhat risky proposition ... 
 
 Not true, and Dov knows that. What Dov mean is that the only ADOBE
 workaround for *prepress* PDF's is to ...
 
 There are quite a few repair options out there in the wild cyperspace, and
 I think Dov should have the chance to mention some of the very qualified
 work-arounds for this problem, that's actually available for the Frame
 users.
 
 There are QUITE a few.
 
 /Jacob
 
 
 -Oprindelig meddelelse-
 Fra: framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com
 [mailto:framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com] På vegne af Dov Isaacs
 Sendt: 1. februar 2011 15:25
 Til: framers@lists.frameusers.com
 Emne: RE: [Violation] Annotations were found inside the BleedBox, TrimBox
 or ArtBox on the following pages and PDFX/1-a standard
 
 Joanna,
 
 FrameMaker is not a graphic arts application. Its output is primarily RGB
 and the PostScript generated by the driver is not setup to generate PDF that
 will conform to the PDF/X-1a specification.
 
 The PDF/X-1a specification doesn't allow for any of the cross reference
 stuff capabilities of PDF, annotations, embedded video, etc. It is strictly
 for old-style PDF CMYK and spot color printing without any transparency,
 layers, JPEG2000 compression, etc.
 
 
 Unfortunately, the current FrameMaker save as CMYK PDF doesn't quite work
 right to yield a CMYK (plus spot color) PDF. The only workaround is to use
 Distiller settings to convert the RGB to CMYK, a somewhat risky proposition,
 or to use the color conversion features of Acrobat X Pro to selectively
 convert colors from RGB to CMYK and then, use the Acrobat X Pro preflight
 function to fix the file and create PDF/X-1a.
 
   - Dov
 
 
  -Original Message-
  From: framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com
 [mailto:framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of
  Joanna Przystup
  Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2011 2:10 AM
  To: framers@lists.frameusers.com
  Subject: [Violation] Annotations were found inside the BleedBox, TrimBox,
 or ArtBox on the following
  pages and PDFX/1-a standard
 
  I have a problem with distilling ps file with the PDFX/1-a standard.
  Document is printed to ps from the FrameMaker application.
 
  While distilling file, Acrobat Distiller creates a log containing
 following
  message:
  [Violation] Annotations were found inside the BleedBox, TrimBox, or
 ArtBox
  on the following pages
  and therefore none PDF file is produced.
 
  I guess that it is related to the cross references. But what is strange -
 it
  doesn't appear in all of the books. When printed document is structured -
 it
  is printed well with the PDFX/1-a standard, and doesn't complain about
  annotations.
 
  I've found two solutions for now - but none of them is actually
 acceptable:
  -replace all cross references with text
  -do not select Generate Acrobat Data when printing
 
  I will appreciate your help with solving this problem
 
  Joanna
 ___
 
 
 You are currently subscribed to framers as j...@grafikhuset.dk.
 
 Send list messages to framers@lists.frameusers.com.
 
 To unsubscribe send a blank email to
 framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com
 or visit
 http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/js%40grafikhuset.dk
 
 Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit
 http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

___


You are currently subscribed to framers as arch...@mail-archive.com.

Send list messages to framers@lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

"[Violation] Annotations were found inside the BleedBox, TrimBox or ArtBox on the following pages" and PDFX/1-a standard

[Dov Isaacs]

Yes, Jacob and his company does have a workaround. I unfortunately forgot about 
it.
Nonetheless, it is a workaround hack and it doesn't change the fact that 
Framemaker
does not yet currently have a fully and/or properly functioning method of 
getting
proper DeviceCMYK printing or PDF exactly matching any and all CMYK values 
specified
in FrameMaker or any non-EPS CMYK content placed therein.

- Dov

> -Original Message-
> From: Jacob Sch?ffer [mailto:js at grafikhuset.dk]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2011 12:03 PM
> To: Dov Isaacs; framers at lists.frameusers.com
> Subject: SV: "[Violation] Annotations were found inside the BleedBox, TrimBox 
> or ArtBox on the
> following pages" and PDFX/1-a standard
> 
> Dov said:
> < The only workaround is to use Distiller settings to convert the RGB to
> CMYK, a somewhat risky proposition ... >
> 
> Not true, and Dov knows that. What Dov mean is that the only ADOBE
> workaround for *prepress* PDF's is to ...
> 
> There are quite a few "repair" options out there in the wild cyperspace, and
> I think Dov should have the chance to mention some of the very qualified
> work-arounds for this problem, that's actually available for the Frame
> users.
> 
> There are QUITE a few.
> 
> /Jacob
> 
> 
> -Oprindelig meddelelse-
> Fra: framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com
> [mailto:framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com] P? vegne af Dov Isaacs
> Sendt: 1. februar 2011 15:25
> Til: framers at lists.frameusers.com
> Emne: RE: "[Violation] Annotations were found inside the BleedBox, TrimBox
> or ArtBox on the following pages" and PDFX/1-a standard
> 
> Joanna,
> 
> FrameMaker is not a graphic arts application. Its output is primarily RGB
> and the PostScript generated by the driver is not setup to generate PDF that
> will conform to the PDF/X-1a specification.
> 
> The PDF/X-1a specification doesn't allow for any of the cross reference
> stuff capabilities of PDF, annotations, embedded video, etc. It is strictly
> for old-style PDF CMYK and spot color printing without any transparency,
> layers, JPEG2000 compression, etc.
> 
> 
> Unfortunately, the current FrameMaker "save as CMYK PDF" doesn't quite work
> right to yield a CMYK (plus spot color) PDF. The only workaround is to use
> Distiller settings to convert the RGB to CMYK, a somewhat risky proposition,
> or to use the color conversion features of Acrobat X Pro to selectively
> convert colors from RGB to CMYK and then, use the Acrobat X Pro preflight
> function to "fix" the file and create PDF/X-1a.
> 
>   - Dov
> 
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com
> [mailto:framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of
> > Joanna Przystup
> > Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2011 2:10 AM
> > To: framers at lists.frameusers.com
> > Subject: "[Violation] Annotations were found inside the BleedBox, TrimBox,
> or ArtBox on the following
> > pages" and PDFX/1-a standard
> >
> > I have a problem with distilling ps file with the PDFX/1-a standard.
> > Document is printed to ps from the FrameMaker application.
> >
> > While distilling file, Acrobat Distiller creates a log containing
> following
> > message:
> > "[Violation] Annotations were found inside the BleedBox, TrimBox, or
> ArtBox
> > on the following pages"
> > and therefore none PDF file is produced.
> >
> > I guess that it is related to the cross references. But what is strange -
> it
> > doesn't appear in all of the books. When printed document is structured -
> it
> > is printed well with the PDFX/1-a standard, and doesn't complain about
> > annotations.
> >
> > I've found two solutions for now - but none of them is actually
> acceptable:
> > -replace all cross references with text
> > -do not select Generate Acrobat Data when printing
> >
> > I will appreciate your help with solving this problem
> >
> > Joanna
> ___
> 
> 
> You are currently subscribed to framers as js at grafikhuset.dk.
> 
> Send list messages to framers at lists.frameusers.com.
> 
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> framers-unsubscribe at lists.frameusers.com
> or visit
> http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/js%40grafikhuset.dk
> 
> Send administrative questions to listadmin at frameusers.com. Visit
> http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

RE: [Violation] Annotations were found inside the BleedBox, TrimBox or ArtBox on the following pages and PDFX/1-a standard

[Dov Isaacs]

Joanna,

FrameMaker is not a graphic arts application. Its output is primarily RGB and 
the PostScript generated by the driver is not setup to generate PDF that will 
conform to the PDF/X-1a specification.

The PDF/X-1a specification doesn't allow for any of the cross reference stuff 
capabilities of PDF, annotations, embedded video, etc. It is strictly for 
old-style PDF CMYK and spot color printing without any transparency, layers, 
JPEG2000 compression, etc.

Unfortunately, the current FrameMaker save as CMYK PDF doesn't quite work 
right to yield a CMYK (plus spot color) PDF. The only workaround is to use 
Distiller settings to convert the RGB to CMYK, a somewhat risky proposition, or 
to use the color conversion features of Acrobat X Pro to selectively convert 
colors from RGB to CMYK and then, use the Acrobat X Pro preflight function to 
fix the file and create PDF/X-1a.

- Dov


 -Original Message-
 From: framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com 
 [mailto:framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of
 Joanna Przystup
 Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2011 2:10 AM
 To: framers@lists.frameusers.com
 Subject: [Violation] Annotations were found inside the BleedBox, TrimBox, or 
 ArtBox on the following
 pages and PDFX/1-a standard
 
 I have a problem with distilling ps file with the PDFX/1-a standard.
 Document is printed to ps from the FrameMaker application.
 
 While distilling file, Acrobat Distiller creates a log containing following
 message:
 [Violation] Annotations were found inside the BleedBox, TrimBox, or ArtBox
 on the following pages
 and therefore none PDF file is produced.
 
 I guess that it is related to the cross references. But what is strange - it
 doesn't appear in all of the books. When printed document is structured - it
 is printed well with the PDFX/1-a standard, and doesn't complain about
 annotations.
 
 I've found two solutions for now - but none of them is actually acceptable:
 -replace all cross references with text
 -do not select Generate Acrobat Data when printing
 
 I will appreciate your help with solving this problem
 
 Joanna
___


You are currently subscribed to framers as arch...@mail-archive.com.

Send list messages to framers@lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

"[Violation] Annotations were found inside the BleedBox, TrimBox or ArtBox on the following pages" and PDFX/1-a standard

[Dov Isaacs]

Joanna,

FrameMaker is not a graphic arts application. Its output is primarily RGB and 
the PostScript generated by the driver is not setup to generate PDF that will 
conform to the PDF/X-1a specification.

The PDF/X-1a specification doesn't allow for any of the cross reference stuff 
capabilities of PDF, annotations, embedded video, etc. It is strictly for 
old-style PDF CMYK and spot color printing without any transparency, layers, 
JPEG2000 compression, etc.

Unfortunately, the current FrameMaker "save as CMYK PDF" doesn't quite work 
right to yield a CMYK (plus spot color) PDF. The only workaround is to use 
Distiller settings to convert the RGB to CMYK, a somewhat risky proposition, or 
to use the color conversion features of Acrobat X Pro to selectively convert 
colors from RGB to CMYK and then, use the Acrobat X Pro preflight function to 
"fix" the file and create PDF/X-1a.

- Dov


> -Original Message-
> From: framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com [mailto:framers-bounces at 
> lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of
> Joanna Przystup
> Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2011 2:10 AM
> To: framers at lists.frameusers.com
> Subject: "[Violation] Annotations were found inside the BleedBox, TrimBox, or 
> ArtBox on the following
> pages" and PDFX/1-a standard
> 
> I have a problem with distilling ps file with the PDFX/1-a standard.
> Document is printed to ps from the FrameMaker application.
> 
> While distilling file, Acrobat Distiller creates a log containing following
> message:
> "[Violation] Annotations were found inside the BleedBox, TrimBox, or ArtBox
> on the following pages"
> and therefore none PDF file is produced.
> 
> I guess that it is related to the cross references. But what is strange - it
> doesn't appear in all of the books. When printed document is structured - it
> is printed well with the PDFX/1-a standard, and doesn't complain about
> annotations.
> 
> I've found two solutions for now - but none of them is actually acceptable:
> -replace all cross references with text
> -do not select Generate Acrobat Data when printing
> 
> I will appreciate your help with solving this problem
> 
> Joanna

RE: Historical FrameMaker upgrades

[Dov Isaacs]

Since FrameMaker 7.x is no longer eligible for upgrade pricing and because 
there was no version of FrameMaker for Macintosh beyond FrameMaker 7, there is 
no remaining crossgrade path for users of Macintosh versions of FrameMaker. 
Your only upgrade path now is to buy a newer version of FrameMaker and either 
run it on Windows hardware or on a virtual machine running on a Intel 
processor-based Macintosh.

- Dov

 -Original Message-
 From: framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com 
 [mailto:framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of
 Steve Rickaby
 Sent: Sunday, January 23, 2011 3:53 AM
 To: framers@lists.frameusers.com
 Subject: Historical FrameMaker upgrades
 
 I've just discovered that with FrameMaker 10 Adobe are doing the same as with 
 the Creative suite apps:
 historical upgrade paths are closed off, so one cannot upgrade directly from 
 FrameMaker 7 to
 FrameMaker 10.
 
 Does anyone (Dov?) happen to know what the situation is with crossgrades? 
 I've been using FrameMaker 7
 on Mac with complete satisfaction for several years and many books; my 
 forward path is either an Intel
 Mac with FrameMaker 9 or 10 under VMWare, or upgrade my Windows box, which is 
 geriatric. In view of
 the less than warm welcome of FrameMaker 10 (and, for that matter, 9), maybe 
 I should look for a full
 copy of Windows FrameMaker 8 on eBay or elsewhere?
 
 I have never been sure how the Adobe crossgrade procedure works, and 
 specifically, the check process
 for a valid existing copy.
 
 Any information welcomed.
 
 --
 Steve
___


You are currently subscribed to framers as arch...@mail-archive.com.

Send list messages to framers@lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

Historical FrameMaker upgrades

[Dov Isaacs]

Since FrameMaker 7.x is no longer eligible for upgrade pricing and because 
there was no version of FrameMaker for Macintosh beyond FrameMaker 7, there is 
no remaining crossgrade path for users of Macintosh versions of FrameMaker. 
Your only upgrade path now is to buy a newer version of FrameMaker and either 
run it on Windows hardware or on a virtual machine running on a Intel 
processor-based Macintosh.

- Dov

> -Original Message-
> From: framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com [mailto:framers-bounces at 
> lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of
> Steve Rickaby
> Sent: Sunday, January 23, 2011 3:53 AM
> To: framers at lists.frameusers.com
> Subject: Historical FrameMaker upgrades
> 
> I've just discovered that with FrameMaker 10 Adobe are doing the same as with 
> the Creative suite apps:
> historical upgrade paths are closed off, so one cannot upgrade directly from 
> FrameMaker 7 to
> FrameMaker 10.
> 
> Does anyone (Dov?) happen to know what the situation is with crossgrades? 
> I've been using FrameMaker 7
> on Mac with complete satisfaction for several years and many books; my 
> forward path is either an Intel
> Mac with FrameMaker 9 or 10 under VMWare, or upgrade my Windows box, which is 
> geriatric. In view of
> the less than warm welcome of FrameMaker 10 (and, for that matter, 9), maybe 
> I should look for a full
> copy of Windows FrameMaker 8 on eBay or elsewhere?
> 
> I have never been sure how the Adobe crossgrade procedure works, and 
> specifically, the check process
> for a valid existing copy.
> 
> Any information welcomed.
> 
> --
> Steve

RE: FM9 and Windows 7 64 bit - SOLUTION

[Dov Isaacs]

Glad to know you are up and going.

I've heard and personally experienced some installation problems associated 
with inability to properly read/access a CD or DVD. There are a number of 
underlying issues including (1) marginal CD/DVD drive, (2) marginal CD/DVD, and 
(3) the failure of the various layers of installation programs to properly 
report problems. Much of the installation is actually done via the operating 
system's Microsoft Installer software based on scripts setup by the Adobe 
installation software. Errors that occur in reading the CD/DVD are generally 
not propagated back to the Adobe installer such that an error can be reasonably 
reported and sometimes the errors are not reported back to the Adobe installer 
at all.

I'll try to suggest to the powers that be that perhaps a better strategy for 
Adobe's installation software would be to fully copy the contents of the CD/DVD 
to a temporary area, reporting any problems in reading the CD/DVD at that 
point, and then doing the actual installation from the files temporarily 
residing on the system's hard drive, in other words, automating the process 
that many of us find more successful that directly installing from the 
installation CD/DVD media.

- Dov

 -Original Message-
 From: Alison Craig [mailto:alison.cr...@ultrasonix.com]
 Sent: Friday, January 21, 2011 11:18 AM
 To: Dov Isaacs; framers@lists.frameusers.com
 Subject: RE: FM9 and Windows 7 64 bit - SOLUTION
 
 
 Dov:
 
 I didn't really expect uninstall/reinstall to work but it was late and my IT 
 guy had left for the day,
 so you try what you know even if you have no reason to suspect it will work. 
 (Sometimes, if you're
 *very* lucky, life - or more specifically, computers - can surprise you in a 
 good way! Unfortunately,
 it wasn't my day.)
 
 Before calling Adobe support I followed some other advice that came in the 
 form of a KB link:
 http://kb2.adobe.com/cps/406/kb406891.html.
 
 After a few tries, I found a solution that worked (installing from the 
 desktop as opposed to the DVD).
 
 Alison
 
 FYI: IT has disabled UAC for me!
 
 Alison Craig, Technical Writer
 Ultrasonix Medical Corporation
 Tel: (604) 279-8550, ext 127
 E-mail: alison.cr...@ultrasonix.com
 
___


You are currently subscribed to framers as arch...@mail-archive.com.

Send list messages to framers@lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

FM9 and Windows 7 64 bit - SOLUTION

[Dov Isaacs]

Glad to know you are up and going.

I've heard and personally experienced some installation problems associated 
with inability to properly read/access a CD or DVD. There are a number of 
underlying issues including (1) marginal CD/DVD drive, (2) marginal CD/DVD, and 
(3) the failure of the various layers of installation programs to properly 
report problems. Much of the installation is actually done via the operating 
system's "Microsoft Installer" software based on scripts setup by the Adobe 
installation software. Errors that occur in reading the CD/DVD are generally 
not propagated back to the Adobe installer such that an error can be reasonably 
reported and sometimes the errors are not reported back to the Adobe installer 
at all.

I'll try to suggest to the "powers that be" that perhaps a better strategy for 
Adobe's installation software would be to fully copy the contents of the CD/DVD 
to a temporary area, reporting any problems in reading the CD/DVD at that 
point, and then doing the actual installation from the files temporarily 
residing on the system's hard drive, in other words, automating the process 
that many of us find more successful that directly installing from the 
installation CD/DVD media.

- Dov

> -Original Message-
> From: Alison Craig [mailto:Alison.Craig at ultrasonix.com]
> Sent: Friday, January 21, 2011 11:18 AM
> To: Dov Isaacs; framers at lists.frameusers.com
> Subject: RE: FM9 and Windows 7 64 bit - SOLUTION
> 
> 
> Dov:
> 
> I didn't really expect uninstall/reinstall to work but it was late and my IT 
> guy had left for the day,
> so you try what you know even if you have no reason to suspect it will work. 
> (Sometimes, if you're
> *very* lucky, life - or more specifically, computers - can surprise you in a 
> good way! Unfortunately,
> it wasn't my day.)
> 
> Before calling Adobe support I followed some other advice that came in the 
> form of a KB link:
> http://kb2.adobe.com/cps/406/kb406891.html.
> 
> After a few tries, I found a solution that worked (installing from the 
> desktop as opposed to the DVD).
> 
> Alison
> 
> FYI: IT has disabled UAC for me!
> 
> Alison Craig, Technical Writer
> Ultrasonix Medical Corporation
> Tel: (604) 279-8550, ext 127
> E-mail: alison.craig at ultrasonix.com
> 

RE: FM9 and Windows 7 64 bit - Help!

[Dov Isaacs]

Alison,

The combination of Windows 7 64-bit and FrameMaker 9 not only is supported by 
Adobe, but it does normally work. And it works on four systems I use with 
Windows 7 64-bit.

The fact that it is installed in the Program Files (x86) directory is not a 
problem. By convention, that is where it should be installed.

FWIW, uninstalling and reinstalling software rarely solves anything.

Make sure that when you call Adobe Technical Support, you have all the 
information about the error message available for the Adobe Tech Support 
technician.

Sorry that you hate new hardware. On the other hand it often takes me several 
days to bring up a new system including full OS configuration, system 
decrapification (getting rid of all the shovelware - mostly eval software - 
that the computer manufacturer loads on the system), loading applications, and 
setting all preference - OS and applications - the way I want them.

My experience is that if you know how to make the appropriate tweaks, Windows 7 
and especially 64-bit Windows 7 is much more reliable and better performing, 
especially on multicore and/or multiple CPUs than Windows XP. One of the 
secrets is to totally disable UAC (User Account Control).

- Dov



 -Original Message-
 From: framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com 
 [mailto:framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of
 Alison Craig
 Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 6:00 PM
 To: framers@lists.frameusers.com
 Subject: FM9 and Windows 7 64 bit - Help!
 
 FM 9 Version: 9.0p255
 Unstructured
 OS: Trying to install on Windows 7, 64 bit (brand new machine)
 FM Experience: 19 months
 
 
 Before I try Adobe support tomorrow, I thought I'd present my problem to the 
 List.
 
 I am trying to install FM 9 on my brand new Windows 7, 64 bit machine (if 
 system specs would help I
 can provide those.)
 
 The install seems to work fine and when I open it for the first time, it asks 
 for structured or
 unstructured (unstructured) and presents the Registration screen (which I'm 
 ignoring for the time
 being). When it tries to access the actual FM9 program I get a serious 
 error along with the file
 name and location to report the error. I've uninstalled and reinstalled but 
 it didn't help.
 
 FYI: It's installed into Program Files (x86) and not Program Files.
 
 Before we completed the specs for my new system I checked that you could run 
 FM9 on Windows 7 and the
 answer was yes - but of course those specs have now disappeared as FM10 is 
 now available.
 
 I really hate new hardware (and Windows 7).
 
 Any suggestions?
 
 Alison
 
 
 Alison Craig, Technical Writer
 Ultrasonix Medical Corporation
 130 - 4311 Viking Way
 Richmond, BC  V6V 2K9
 Tel: (604) 279-8550, ext 127
 E-mail: alison.cr...@ultrasonix.commailto:alison.cr...@ultrasonix.com
 
 
 ___
 
 
 You are currently subscribed to framers as isa...@adobe.com.
 
 Send list messages to framers@lists.frameusers.com.
 
 To unsubscribe send a blank email to
 framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com
 or visit 
 http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/isaacs%40adobe.com
 
 Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit
 http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
___


You are currently subscribed to framers as arch...@mail-archive.com.

Send list messages to framers@lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

FM9 and Windows 7 64 bit - Help!

[Dov Isaacs]

Alison,

The combination of Windows 7 64-bit and FrameMaker 9 not only is supported by 
Adobe, but it does normally work. And it works on four systems I use with 
Windows 7 64-bit.

The fact that it is installed in the "Program Files (x86)" directory is not a 
problem. By convention, that is where it should be installed.

FWIW, uninstalling and reinstalling software rarely solves anything.

Make sure that when you call Adobe Technical Support, you have all the 
information about the error message available for the Adobe Tech Support 
technician.

Sorry that you hate new hardware. On the other hand it often takes me several 
days to bring up a new system including full OS configuration, system 
"decrapification" (getting rid of all the shovelware - mostly eval software - 
that the computer manufacturer loads on the system), loading applications, and 
setting all preference - OS and applications - the way I want them.

My experience is that if you know how to make the appropriate tweaks, Windows 7 
and especially 64-bit Windows 7 is much more reliable and better performing, 
especially on multicore and/or multiple CPUs than Windows XP. One of the 
secrets is to totally disable UAC (User Account Control).

- Dov



> -Original Message-
> From: framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com [mailto:framers-bounces at 
> lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of
> Alison Craig
> Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 6:00 PM
> To: framers at lists.frameusers.com
> Subject: FM9 and Windows 7 64 bit - Help!
> 
> FM 9 Version: 9.0p255
> Unstructured
> OS: Trying to install on Windows 7, 64 bit (brand new machine)
> FM Experience: 19 months
> 
> 
> Before I try Adobe support tomorrow, I thought I'd present my problem to the 
> List.
> 
> I am trying to install FM 9 on my brand new Windows 7, 64 bit machine (if 
> system specs would help I
> can provide those.)
> 
> The install seems to work fine and when I open it for the first time, it asks 
> for structured or
> unstructured (unstructured) and presents the Registration screen (which I'm 
> ignoring for the time
> being). When it tries to access the actual FM9 program I get a "serious 
> error" along with the file
> name and location to report the error. I've uninstalled and reinstalled but 
> it didn't help.
> 
> FYI: It's installed into "Program Files (x86)" and not "Program Files".
> 
> Before we completed the specs for my new system I checked that you could run 
> FM9 on Windows 7 and the
> answer was yes - but of course those specs have now disappeared as FM10 is 
> now available.
> 
> I really hate new hardware (and Windows 7).
> 
> Any suggestions?
> 
> Alison
> 
> 
> Alison Craig, Technical Writer
> Ultrasonix Medical Corporation
> 130 - 4311 Viking Way
> Richmond, BC  V6V 2K9
> Tel: (604) 279-8550, ext 127
> E-mail: alison.craig at ultrasonix.com
> 
> 
> ___
> 
> 
> You are currently subscribed to framers as isaacs at adobe.com.
> 
> Send list messages to framers at lists.frameusers.com.
> 
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> framers-unsubscribe at lists.frameusers.com
> or visit 
> http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/isaacs%40adobe.com
> 
> Send administrative questions to listadmin at frameusers.com. Visit
> http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

Announcement - Acrobat 10 Launch Event - Israel

[Dov Isaacs]

לחברי בארץ ישראל:
http://acrobatx.eventbrite.com/

  - דב

___


You are currently subscribed to framers as arch...@mail-archive.com.

Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

Announcement - Acrobat 10 Launch Event - Israel

[Dov Isaacs]

לחברי בארץ ישראל:
http://acrobatx.eventbrite.com/

  - דב

___


You are currently subscribed to framers as arch...@mail-archive.com.

Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

Announcement - Acrobat 10 Launch Event - Israel

[Dov Isaacs]

?  ?:


  - ??

Announcement - Acrobat 10 Launch Event - Israel

[Dov Isaacs]

?  ?:


  - ??

RE: [OT] Adobe's pricing policy

[Dov Isaacs]

Acrobat X is not shipping yet nor has Adobe committed to a November 1 ship date.

It is pronounced Acrobat Ten - as usual, it's a marketing thing ...

- Dov

 -Original Message-
 From: framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com 
 [mailto:framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of
 Syed Zaeem Hosain (syed.hos...@aeris.net)
 Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2010 12:08 PM
 To: Mike Wickham; framers@lists.frameusers.com
 Subject: RE: [OT] Adobe's pricing policy
 
   But why bother with 9? X is shipping...
 
  Say what? When? And are they really going to call it X instead of 10?
 
  Mike Wickham
 
 I got my e-mail from Adobe about this sometime last week as I recall. I 
 believe the shipping date is
 Nov 1, but forget where I saw that.
 
 And, I have no idea why it is X instead of 10. :)
 
 My only [usual] gripe is with the upgrade pricing (like all Adobe upgrades!). 
 It is $199 regardless of
 whether you have Acrobat 9 Pro *or* Acrobat 9 Pro Extended to go to Acrobat X 
 Pro (there is only one X
 Pro version - nothing called X Pro Extended as far as I can know).
 
 IMHO, the price for going from 9 Pro Extended to X Pro should be lower - 
 since we already paid a
 premium for that 9 Pro Extended version!
 
 Z
___


You are currently subscribed to framers as arch...@mail-archive.com.

Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

[OT] Adobe's pricing policy

[Dov Isaacs]

Acrobat X is not shipping yet nor has Adobe committed to a November 1 ship date.

It is pronounced "Acrobat Ten" - as usual, it's a marketing "thing" ...

- Dov

> -Original Message-
> From: framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com [mailto:framers-bounces at 
> lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of
> Syed Zaeem Hosain (Syed.Hosain at aeris.net)
> Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2010 12:08 PM
> To: Mike Wickham; framers at lists.frameusers.com
> Subject: RE: [OT] Adobe's pricing policy
> 
> > > But why bother with 9? X is shipping...
> 
> > Say what? When? And are they really going to call it X instead of 10?
> 
> > Mike Wickham
> 
> I got my e-mail from Adobe about this sometime last week as I recall. I 
> believe the shipping date is
> Nov 1, but forget where I saw that.
> 
> And, I have no idea why it is "X" instead of "10". :)
> 
> My only [usual] gripe is with the upgrade pricing (like all Adobe upgrades!). 
> It is $199 regardless of
> whether you have Acrobat 9 Pro *or* Acrobat 9 Pro Extended to go to Acrobat X 
> Pro (there is only one X
> Pro version - nothing called X Pro Extended as far as I can know).
> 
> IMHO, the price for going from 9 Pro Extended to X Pro should be lower - 
> since we already paid a
> premium for that 9 Pro Extended version!
> 
> Z

[OT] Adobe's pricing policy

[Dov Isaacs]

Acrobat X was announced, but is certainly not yet shipping.

- Dov

> -Original Message-
> From: framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com [mailto:framers-bounces at 
> lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of
> Art Campbell
> Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2010 7:36 AM
> To: Yves Barbion
> Cc: framers at lists.frameusers.com
> Subject: Re: [OT] Adobe's pricing policy
> 
> Does Belgium have a VAT?
> 
> But why bother with 9? X is shipping...
> 
> Art Campbell

RE: Adobe Acrobat PDF Tracker Question

[Dov Isaacs]

Problem is very simple. You really shouldn't have Reader and Acrobat on the
same system. Really doesn't buy you anything.

Furthermore, the last program installed is the one that owns the .pdf 
extension.

- Dov

 -Original Message-
 From: framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com 
 [mailto:framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of
 theboggette
 Sent: Friday, October 22, 2010 5:51 AM
 To: framers@lists.frameusers.com
 Subject: Adobe Acrobat PDF Tracker Question
 
 Whenever I open a PDF from Adobe Tracker, it automatically opens in Reader 
 instead of Pro.  But Reader
 doesn't have the same options as Pro.
 
 Anyone know how to reset this so that Pro opens as the default?  All my 
 windows file associations are
 set correctly and show that it should be opening in Pro.  But when I click, 
 it's Reader.  If I have
 Pro already open when I click, it opens in Pro.  But if I don't, Reader opens.
 
 Help?
 
 Trish
 
 PS.  I have Acrobat Pro 9.4, and Reader 9.4 on Windows XP.
___


You are currently subscribed to framers as arch...@mail-archive.com.

Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

Adobe Acrobat PDF Tracker Question

[Dov Isaacs]

Problem is very simple. You really shouldn't have Reader and Acrobat on the
same system. Really doesn't buy you anything.

Furthermore, the last program installed is the one that "owns" the .pdf 
extension.

- Dov

> -Original Message-
> From: framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com [mailto:framers-bounces at 
> lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of
> theboggette
> Sent: Friday, October 22, 2010 5:51 AM
> To: framers at lists.frameusers.com
> Subject: Adobe Acrobat PDF Tracker Question
> 
> Whenever I open a PDF from Adobe Tracker, it automatically opens in Reader 
> instead of Pro.? But Reader
> doesn't have the same options as Pro.
> 
> Anyone know how to reset this so that Pro opens as the default?? All my 
> windows file associations are
> set correctly and show that it should be opening in Pro.? But when I click, 
> it's Reader.? If I have
> Pro already open when I click, it opens in Pro.? But if I don't, Reader opens.
> 
> Help?
> 
> Trish
> 
> PS.? I have Acrobat Pro 9.4, and Reader 9.4 on Windows XP.

RE: Acrobat 9 - a disaster

[Dov Isaacs]

Hi Troy,

You have indeed identified a very good and valid reason to want to test your 
PDF files under Reader as opposed to the full Adobe Acrobat product. Similar 
issues are use of sophisticated Javascript and forms capabilities in PDF files.

However, I still believe and insist that if you try to test with Reader on the 
same physical and logical system on which you have created your PDF, you are 
seriously compromising your testing. Why?

(1)  If you have both Reader and Acrobat installed in parallel, only 
one of these two owns the .PDF extension for purposes of double-clicking in 
places such as Windows Explorer, browsers, and e-mail clients and it is not 
easy to do a switcherooni to cause one or the other of Reader or Acrobat to 
own the PDF extension. Except for the browser, the last installed wins. Too 
easy to find yourself in the wrong client due to this.

(2)  The typical authoring system is much better endowed in terms of 
hardware and software resources than the typical client system (yes, I know 
that many technical writers end up with ancient, engineering hand-me-downs, but 
you'd be surprised how good those are compared to the typical enterprise client 
system which is often running on ancient hardware and much older software 
versions. Such clients are often running on memory and disk constrained systems 
with limited network access, only the system fonts installed (those provided 
with the OS), old e-mail clients versions, old browser versions, and ancient 
versions of Adobe Reader (7 or earlier).

As such, you really should be running your PDF file testing in a sandbox with 
limited resources. This sandbox could take the form of old hand-me-down systems 
with the barest software configuration installed or perhaps even a virtualized 
system using VMWare or similar products. The latter solution doesn't simulate 
limited hardware resources, but it would allow you to have virtual limited 
software setups for a number of old versions of Reader and for that matter, 
other less-capable PDF readers from third parties that your documents' 
receivers may be using. And if you are really serious about this, you might 
also setup a not-quite-up-to-date Macintosh and test what happens when your PDF 
files are opened up with the MacOS Preview program (often not a very pretty 
site).

- Dov

From: Troy Fey [mailto:troy@opinicus.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 2010 9:25 AM
To: Dov Isaacs
Cc: dr_go...@pobox.com; Framers E-mail List
Subject: Re: Acrobat 9 - a disaster

Dov -- I save all your responses.  Thanks for your continued support.  I 
believe I have a justification for why one would have an installation of Adobe 
Reader co-existing with an installation of Adobe Acrobat.

We've had to use Adobe Reader to verify the digital signature and mark-up 
capabilities were properly enabled by Adobe Acrobat.  We've had several 
round-trip exercises with SMEs and our Tech Writer where these capabilities 
weren't properly enabled in the PDF.   Mistakes happen, but because our Tech 
Writer didn't have a separate installation of Adobe Reader he failed to verify 
they were enabled before sending them out for review/signature and that lead to 
a lot of SME frustration.   Please excuse my ignorance if this is already 
common knowledge, but it seemed to be relevant for this thread.  Is there a way 
to emulate the limited capabilities of Adobe Reader within Acrobat?

-- Troy

Dov Isaacs wrote:

Steve,



Read the original thread. I am not going to repeat everything (and

it was quite a lot) that was discussed on this forum a few weeks ago,

especially related to engineering and testing discipline as far as

how PDF files are viewed and processed under what circumstances.



But NO, there is nothing WRITTEN about this from Adobe. On the other

hand, you should trust what I am telling you based on my 21 years at

Adobe and my working with Acrobat and Reader since Release 1 of same

as well as having to debug workflows and PDF files during all that time.



Quite frankly, the only time I had problems with anyone viewing a PDF

file that I produced on Acrobat-only systems (no Reader co-installed)

were with users who insisted on using St. Steve the Infallible's MacOS

Preview program's subset PDF viewing capabilities (or lack thereof).



The fact that Adobe doesn't prohibit you from parallel installation of

Acrobat and Reader doesn't mean that such installations are recommended

or really useful.



   - Dov


___


You are currently subscribed to framers as arch...@mail-archive.com.

Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

Acrobat 9 - a disaster

[Dov Isaacs]

Hi Troy,

You have indeed identified a very good and valid reason to want to test your 
PDF files under Reader as opposed to the full Adobe Acrobat product. Similar 
issues are use of sophisticated Javascript and forms capabilities in PDF files.

However, I still believe and insist that if you try to test with Reader on the 
same physical and logical system on which you have created your PDF, you are 
seriously compromising your testing. Why?

(1)  If you have both Reader and Acrobat installed in parallel, only 
one of these two "owns" the .PDF extension for purposes of double-clicking in 
places such as Windows Explorer, browsers, and e-mail clients and it is not 
easy to do a switcherooni to cause one or the other of Reader or Acrobat to 
"own" the PDF extension. Except for the browser, the last installed "wins." Too 
easy to find yourself in the "wrong" client due to this.

(2)  The typical authoring system is much better endowed in terms of 
hardware and software resources than the typical client system (yes, I know 
that many technical writers end up with ancient, engineering hand-me-downs, but 
you'd be surprised how good those are compared to the typical enterprise client 
system which is often running on ancient hardware and much older software 
versions. Such clients are often running on memory and disk constrained systems 
with limited network access, only the system fonts installed (those provided 
with the OS), old e-mail clients versions, old browser versions, and ancient 
versions of Adobe Reader (7 or earlier).

As such, you really should be running your PDF file testing in a "sandbox" with 
limited resources. This sandbox could take the form of old hand-me-down systems 
with the barest software configuration installed or perhaps even a virtualized 
system using VMWare or similar products. The latter solution doesn't simulate 
limited hardware resources, but it would allow you to have virtual limited 
software setups for a number of old versions of Reader and for that matter, 
other less-capable PDF "readers" from third parties that your documents' 
receivers may be using. And if you are really serious about this, you might 
also setup a not-quite-up-to-date Macintosh and test what happens when your PDF 
files are opened up with the MacOS Preview program (often not a very pretty 
site).

- Dov

From: Troy Fey [mailto:troy@opinicus.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 2010 9:25 AM
To: Dov Isaacs
Cc: dr_gonzo at pobox.com; Framers E-mail List
Subject: Re: Acrobat 9 - a disaster

Dov -- I save all your responses.  Thanks for your continued support.  I 
believe I have a justification for why one would have an installation of Adobe 
Reader co-existing with an installation of Adobe Acrobat.

We've had to use Adobe Reader to verify the digital signature and mark-up 
capabilities were properly enabled by Adobe Acrobat.  We've had several 
round-trip exercises with SMEs and our Tech Writer where these capabilities 
weren't properly enabled in the PDF.   Mistakes happen, but because our Tech 
Writer didn't have a separate installation of Adobe Reader he failed to verify 
they were enabled before sending them out for review/signature and that lead to 
a lot of SME frustration.   Please excuse my ignorance if this is already 
common knowledge, but it seemed to be relevant for this thread.  Is there a way 
to emulate the limited capabilities of Adobe Reader within Acrobat?

-- Troy

Dov Isaacs wrote:

Steve,



Read the original thread. I am not going to repeat everything (and

it was quite a lot) that was discussed on this forum a few weeks ago,

especially related to engineering and testing discipline as far as

how PDF files are viewed and processed under what circumstances.



But NO, there is nothing WRITTEN about this from Adobe. On the other

hand, you should trust what I am telling you based on my 21 years at

Adobe and my working with Acrobat and Reader since Release 1 of same

as well as having to debug workflows and PDF files during all that time.



Quite frankly, the only time I had problems with anyone viewing a PDF

file that I produced on Acrobat-only systems (no Reader co-installed)

were with users who insisted on using St. Steve the Infallible's MacOS

Preview program's subset PDF viewing capabilities (or lack thereof).



The fact that Adobe doesn't prohibit you from parallel installation of

Acrobat and Reader doesn't mean that such installations are recommended

or really useful.



   - Dov

RE: Acrobat 9 - a disaster

[Dov Isaacs]

Steve,

Read the rest of the thread on the Framer's list (this was a few weeks ago).
NO, Acrobat does not install Reader. Acrobat consists of a viewing/editing
program and Distiller plus PDFMakers for various Office and other programs.
I discussed why you don't need or want to test PDF files on the same system
you created them on via Reader.

- Dov


 -Original Message-
 From: framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com 
 [mailto:framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of
 Steve Johnson
 Sent: Sunday, July 25, 2010 7:37 AM
 To: Dov Isaacs
 Cc: Framers E-mail List
 Subject: Re: Acrobat 9 - a disaster
 
 Since when? Is that by design or by accident? Doesn't installing
 Acrobat also install Reader?
 
 How many of my users have Acrobat installed? Of course I want Reader
 installed so I can see PDFs like they do.
 
 On Sun, Jul 25, 2010 at 9:23 AM, Dov Isaacs isa...@adobe.com wrote:
  Although you CAN have both Reader and Acrobat installed simultaneously
  (assuming the same version), it is very strongly NOT RECOMMENDED for a
  number of very good reasons. It certainly does not add any functionality
  to one's system. Having said that, I will add that having both Reader and
  Acrobat of the same version on a system is most unlikely to cause the
  symptoms described.
 
         - Dov
 
  -Original Message-
  From: Steve Johnson [mailto:chinask...@gmail.com]
  Sent: Sunday, July 25, 2010 7:19 AM
  To: Fei Min Lorente
  Cc: Dov Isaacs; Framers E-mail List
  Subject: Re: Acrobat 9 - a disaster
 
  You CAN have Reader and Acrobat at the same time. You CANNOT have two
  Acrobats; IOW, two PDF creators.
 
  On Sun, Jul 25, 2010 at 8:14 AM, Fei Min Lorente
  feimin.lore...@onsemi.com wrote:
   Thanks, Dov! I was experiencing the same problem as Alison, insofar as
   my browser would crash when I tried to look at a PDF in it (just
   clicking on a URL). We ended up working around it by setting the Acrobat
   internet preferences to not display PDF in browser. But now that you
   mention that you can't even have Reader and Acrobat installed at the
   same time, I noticed that I have Adobe Reader 9 as well as Adobe Acrobat
   9 Pro. Our company pushed Reader 9 onto all our computers, so I'm not
   sure I can get rid of it, but at least now I know why I'm having that
   PDF in a browser problem.
  
   I posted this before, but just for completeness, I'm on Windows XP SP3
   and using Firefox 3.6.4 and IE 8.
  
   Fei Min Lorente
  
   -Original Message-
   From: framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com
   [mailto:framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of Dov Isaacs
   Sent: Saturday, July 24, 2010 11:39 PM
   To: Framers E-mail List
   Subject: RE: Acrobat 9 - a disaster
   Importance: High
  
   I heard my name used in vain (if not on-line!).
   In terms of Alison's original posting ...
  
   The symptoms you describe with regards to Acrobat 9 are not standard
   Acrobat 9 behaviour. You did not post exactly what Windows and/or
   browser versions you are using, but we currently are unaware of any
   normal situation that would yield the symptoms you describe.
  
   I open PDF files in browser windows on a regular basis with Acrobat 9
   with no problems whatsoever. Likewise, when I click on a URL in a PDF
   file while in Acrobat 9, I get to the website in a browser window.
  
   The only way you can get what you describe as a PDFised version of
   the web page would be if you opened invoked Create PDF=From Web Page
   (Shift-CTRL-O) and that PDF would not be in a browser window. When you
   click on a URL, Acrobat 9 normally prompts you as to whether to allow
   you to open the web page (via a browser) or to block the access to the
   web site. It NEVER creates a PDF file via clicking on a URL unless you
   right-click on a URL and explicitly choose Append to Document or
   Open Weblink as New Document. There are no options or program
   preferences
   which contravene this behaviour.
  
   Any attempt to try diagnosing what's happening on your system would be
   at best wild speculation but it would almost seem like there might be
   competing PDF readers/processors concurrently installed on your
   system.
   Be aware that Adobe does not support concurrent installation of multiple
  
   versions of Acrobat on a single system (such as Acrobat 8 and Acrobat 9
   installed at the same time). Adobe does not recommend concurrent
   installation of the same versions of both Reader and Acrobat on a system
   (such as Acrobat 9 and Reader installed at the same time) or even worse
   differing versions of both Reader and Acrobat on a system (such as
   Acrobat 9 and Reader 8 installed at the same time). Even more so, we
   certainly cannot vouch for what will happen if you have Acrobat or
   Reader
   plus some other third party PDF reader or creator concurrently
   installed.
   If you even have an inkling of how these programs integrate with drivers
  
   and the browser(s) under Window

Acrobat 9 - a disaster

[Dov Isaacs]

Steve,

Read the rest of the thread on the Framer's list (this was a few weeks ago).
NO, Acrobat does not install Reader. Acrobat consists of a viewing/editing
program and Distiller plus PDFMakers for various Office and other programs.
I discussed why you don't need or want to test PDF files on the same system
you created them on via Reader.

- Dov


> -Original Message-
> From: framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com [mailto:framers-bounces at 
> lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of
> Steve Johnson
> Sent: Sunday, July 25, 2010 7:37 AM
> To: Dov Isaacs
> Cc: Framers E-mail List
> Subject: Re: Acrobat 9 - a disaster
> 
> Since when? Is that by design or by accident? Doesn't installing
> Acrobat also install Reader?
> 
> How many of my users have Acrobat installed? Of course I want Reader
> installed so I can see PDFs like they do.
> 
> On Sun, Jul 25, 2010 at 9:23 AM, Dov Isaacs  wrote:
> > Although you CAN have both Reader and Acrobat installed simultaneously
> > (assuming the same version), it is very strongly NOT RECOMMENDED for a
> > number of very good reasons. It certainly does not add any functionality
> > to one's system. Having said that, I will add that having both Reader and
> > Acrobat of the same version on a system is most unlikely to cause the
> > symptoms described.
> >
> > ? ? ? ?- Dov
> >
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: Steve Johnson [mailto:chinaski69 at gmail.com]
> >> Sent: Sunday, July 25, 2010 7:19 AM
> >> To: Fei Min Lorente
> >> Cc: Dov Isaacs; Framers E-mail List
> >> Subject: Re: Acrobat 9 - a disaster
> >>
> >> You CAN have Reader and Acrobat at the same time. You CANNOT have two
> >> Acrobats; IOW, two PDF creators.
> >>
> >> On Sun, Jul 25, 2010 at 8:14 AM, Fei Min Lorente
> >>  wrote:
> >> > Thanks, Dov! I was experiencing the same problem as Alison, insofar as
> >> > my browser would crash when I tried to look at a PDF in it (just
> >> > clicking on a URL). We ended up working around it by setting the Acrobat
> >> > internet preferences to not display PDF in browser. But now that you
> >> > mention that you can't even have Reader and Acrobat installed at the
> >> > same time, I noticed that I have Adobe Reader 9 as well as Adobe Acrobat
> >> > 9 Pro. Our company pushed Reader 9 onto all our computers, so I'm not
> >> > sure I can get rid of it, but at least now I know why I'm having that
> >> > PDF in a browser problem.
> >> >
> >> > I posted this before, but just for completeness, I'm on Windows XP SP3
> >> > and using Firefox 3.6.4 and IE 8.
> >> >
> >> > Fei Min Lorente
> >> >
> >> > -Original Message-
> >> > From: framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com
> >> > [mailto:framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of Dov Isaacs
> >> > Sent: Saturday, July 24, 2010 11:39 PM
> >> > To: Framers E-mail List
> >> > Subject: RE: Acrobat 9 - a disaster
> >> > Importance: High
> >> >
> >> > I heard my name used in vain (if not on-line!).
> >> > In terms of Alison's original posting ...
> >> >
> >> > The symptoms you describe with regards to Acrobat 9 are not standard
> >> > Acrobat 9 behaviour. You did not post exactly what Windows and/or
> >> > browser versions you are using, but we currently are unaware of any
> >> > normal situation that would yield the symptoms you describe.
> >> >
> >> > I open PDF files in browser windows on a regular basis with Acrobat 9
> >> > with no problems whatsoever. Likewise, when I click on a URL in a PDF
> >> > file while in Acrobat 9, I get to the website in a browser window.
> >> >
> >> > The only way you can get what you describe as a "PDFised version of
> >> > the web page" would be if you opened invoked "Create PDF=>From Web Page"
> >> > (Shift-CTRL-O) and that PDF would not be in a browser window. When you
> >> > click on a URL, Acrobat 9 normally prompts you as to whether to allow
> >> > you to open the web page (via a browser) or to block the access to the
> >> > web site. It NEVER creates a PDF file via clicking on a URL unless you
> >> > right-click on a URL and explicitly choose "Append to Document" or
> >> > "Open Weblink as New Document." There are no options or program
> >> > preferences
> >> > which contravene 

Acrobat 9 - a disaster

[Dov Isaacs]

Steve,

Read the original thread. I am not going to repeat everything (and
it was quite a lot) that was discussed on this forum a few weeks ago,
especially related to engineering and testing discipline as far as
how PDF files are viewed and processed under what circumstances.

But NO, there is nothing WRITTEN about this from Adobe. On the other
hand, you should trust what I am telling you based on my 21 years at
Adobe and my working with Acrobat and Reader since Release 1 of same
as well as having to debug workflows and PDF files during all that time.

Quite frankly, the only time I had problems with anyone viewing a PDF
file that I produced on Acrobat-only systems (no Reader co-installed)
were with users who insisted on using St. Steve the Infallible's MacOS
Preview program's subset PDF viewing capabilities (or lack thereof).

The fact that Adobe doesn't prohibit you from parallel installation of
Acrobat and Reader doesn't mean that such installations are recommended
or really useful.

- Dov


> -Original Message-
> From: framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com [mailto:framers-bounces at 
> lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of
> Steve Johnson
> Sent: Sunday, July 25, 2010 11:10 AM
> To: Dov Isaacs
> Cc: Framers E-mail List
> Subject: Re: Acrobat 9 - a disaster
> 
> Show me in writing where Adobe says you should not install the same
> version of Reader and Acrobat on the same system. I cannot find it.
> It's not on the download page of either product, which is where it
> should be. All I can find is info saying you should not install two
> different versions of the same product.
> 
> Even though you're an authority, all I have seen is unsupported
> statements like this saying "I heard that Adobe says you should not do
> this" but where is the statement against it saying why not? And if
> it's so dadgum important, why do the two products allow themselves to
> be installed side by side?
> 
> For several versions now, you cannot run both Acrobat and Reader at
> the same time. I think you're right that Acrobat doesn't install
> Reader. I must have done the Reader install separately.
> 
> The thing about wanting both Reader and Pro because of print/view
> differences is a few versions old but I remember there being
> situations in the past where viewing and printing with each product
> had differences.
> 
> On Sun, Jul 25, 2010 at 12:33 PM, Dov Isaacs  wrote:
> > Guy,
> >
> > See previous responses. Yes, there are UI differences between
> > Acrobat and Reader, but unless you are invoking rather complex
> > Javascript routines that invoke functions that are allowed in
> > Acrobat but not Reader, other than font issues (you should NEVER,
> > repeat NEVER, repeat once again NEVER generate PDF files with
> > unembedded fonts), you should not see any real differences between
> > rendering in Acrobat versus Reader - and the font issue itself
> > would mean that you need to run in a separate environment to gauge
> > the effects of unembedded fonts.
> >
> > ? ? ? ?- Dov
> >
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: Guy K. Haas [mailto:guy at hiskeyboard.com]
> >> Sent: Sunday, July 25, 2010 7:57 AM
> >> To: Dov Isaacs
> >> Cc: Framers E-mail List
> >> Subject: Re: Acrobat 9 - a disaster
> >>
> >> But, Dov---
> >>
> >> I have both installed so that when a reviewer runs into a problem, I can
> >> "see it their way". ?The interfaces of the two are so different that
> >> it's sometimes handy to be able to do this.
> >>
> >> Would it be any less "NOT RECOMMENDED" if one had the Reader on a
> >> removable drive (such as a USB drive) and plugged it in only when needed?
> >>
> >> --Guy K. Haas
> >> ? ?Software Exegete in Silicon Valley
> >>
> >>
> >> On 7/25/2010 7:23 AM, Dov Isaacs wrote:
> >> > Although you CAN have both Reader and Acrobat installed simultaneously
> >> > (assuming the same version), it is very strongly NOT RECOMMENDED for a
> >> > number of very good reasons. It certainly does not add any functionality
> >> > to one's system. Having said that, I will add that having both Reader and
> >> > Acrobat of the same version on a system is most unlikely to cause the
> >> > symptoms described.
> >> >
> >> > ? ? - Dov
> --
> 
> Steve Johnson, dr_gonzo at pobox.com
> ___

RE: Restoring PDF icon to .pdf files after removing Reader

[Dov Isaacs]

Bernie,

Looks like you found one of the nasty side effects of concurrent installations 
and then trying
to repair the damage.

For better or worse, many applications don't simply associate a program with a 
suffix, but
register what is known as a shell extension into the Windows registry. Your 
uninstallation
of Reader 8.1 probably clobbered the shell extension for PDF (you can have only 
one of those)
and the result is the mess you saw.

Two possible fixups:

The simple one is to run Acrobat and go to Help=Repair Acrobat Installation. 
That will trigger
the installer to try to assure that everything is kosher with your 
configuration including the
registry entries and all files associated with installation of Acrobat.

If that doesn't work, get the 2x4 with a nail in the end. As much as I hate 
this solution, here
it goes. Totally and utterly uninstall Acrobat 9.x. Reboot. Install Acrobat 9. 
That should fix
the problem. (I hate suffering from Reinstallzheimers Disease!)

Also note that you should let Acrobat update your system to Acrobat 9.3.3 to 
fix a large number
of bugs and close some nasty security issues.

Good luck and good night!

- Dov


 -Original Message-
 From: framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com 
 [mailto:framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of
 Meyer, Bernard
 Sent: Monday, July 26, 2010 12:50 PM
 To: framers@lists.frameusers.com
 Subject: Restoring PDF icon to .pdf files after removing Reader
 
 Hello, All.
 After reading the recent thread on multiple versions of Acrobat on the same 
 machine, I removed the
 Acrobat Reader (it was v8.1, I believe), leaving only the installation of the 
 full Acrobat tool
 installed. However, apparently, the .PDF extension know longer knew what 
 application it was
 associated with, and so displayed the MS default icon. When I double-clicked 
 such a .pdf file, it
 naturally asked what application to associate it with. I picked Adobe Acrobat 
 (v 9.1), and checked the
 box to always use this app.  So far, so good. When I click on a .pdf file, it 
 opens Acrobat. HOWEVER,
 the files still look as if they don't know what app they are associated with, 
 because they still show
 the MS default icon, not the Acrobat icon. It's not a showstopper by any 
 means, but it would be nice
 to get the right icon back.
 Thanks. I've gleaned lots of useful tips from this list, and (if a personal 
 remark is allowed)
 appreciate the thorough, measured, and sometimes gently humorous way, Dov 
 makes his remarks.
 
 Bernie Meyer
___


You are currently subscribed to framers as arch...@mail-archive.com.

Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

Restoring PDF icon to .pdf files after removing Reader

[Dov Isaacs]

Bernie,

Looks like you found one of the nasty side effects of concurrent installations 
and then trying
to repair the damage.

For better or worse, many applications don't simply associate a program with a 
suffix, but
register what is known as a "shell extension" into the Windows registry. Your 
uninstallation
of Reader 8.1 probably clobbered the shell extension for PDF (you can have only 
one of those)
and the result is the mess you saw.

Two possible fixups:

The simple one is to run Acrobat and go to Help=>Repair Acrobat Installation. 
That will trigger
the installer to try to assure that everything is kosher with your 
configuration including the
registry entries and all files associated with installation of Acrobat.

If that doesn't work, get the 2x4 with a nail in the end. As much as I hate 
this solution, here
it goes. Totally and utterly uninstall Acrobat 9.x. Reboot. Install Acrobat 9. 
That should fix
the problem. (I hate suffering from "Reinstallzheimers Disease!")

Also note that you should let Acrobat update your system to Acrobat 9.3.3 to 
fix a large number
of bugs and close some nasty security issues.

Good luck and good night!

- Dov


> -Original Message-
> From: framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com [mailto:framers-bounces at 
> lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of
> Meyer, Bernard
> Sent: Monday, July 26, 2010 12:50 PM
> To: framers at lists.frameusers.com
> Subject: Restoring PDF icon to .pdf files after removing Reader
> 
> Hello, All.
> After reading the recent thread on multiple versions of Acrobat on the same 
> machine, I removed the
> Acrobat Reader (it was v8.1, I believe), leaving only the installation of the 
> full Acrobat tool
> installed. However, apparently, the .PDF extension know longer "knew" what 
> application it was
> associated with, and so displayed the MS default icon. When I double-clicked 
> such a .pdf file, it
> naturally asked what application to associate it with. I picked Adobe Acrobat 
> (v 9.1), and checked the
> box to always use this app.  So far, so good. When I click on a .pdf file, it 
> opens Acrobat. HOWEVER,
> the files still look as if they don't know what app they are associated with, 
> because they still show
> the MS default icon, not the Acrobat icon. It's not a showstopper by any 
> means, but it would be nice
> to get the right icon back.
> Thanks. I've gleaned lots of useful tips from this list, and (if a personal 
> remark is allowed)
> appreciate the thorough, measured, and sometimes gently humorous way, Dov 
> makes his remarks.
> 
> Bernie Meyer

RE: Acrobat 9 - a disaster

[Dov Isaacs]

Although you CAN have both Reader and Acrobat installed simultaneously
(assuming the same version), it is very strongly NOT RECOMMENDED for a
number of very good reasons. It certainly does not add any functionality
to one's system. Having said that, I will add that having both Reader and
Acrobat of the same version on a system is most unlikely to cause the
symptoms described.

- Dov

 -Original Message-
 From: Steve Johnson [mailto:chinask...@gmail.com]
 Sent: Sunday, July 25, 2010 7:19 AM
 To: Fei Min Lorente
 Cc: Dov Isaacs; Framers E-mail List
 Subject: Re: Acrobat 9 - a disaster
 
 You CAN have Reader and Acrobat at the same time. You CANNOT have two
 Acrobats; IOW, two PDF creators.
 
 On Sun, Jul 25, 2010 at 8:14 AM, Fei Min Lorente
 feimin.lore...@onsemi.com wrote:
  Thanks, Dov! I was experiencing the same problem as Alison, insofar as
  my browser would crash when I tried to look at a PDF in it (just
  clicking on a URL). We ended up working around it by setting the Acrobat
  internet preferences to not display PDF in browser. But now that you
  mention that you can't even have Reader and Acrobat installed at the
  same time, I noticed that I have Adobe Reader 9 as well as Adobe Acrobat
  9 Pro. Our company pushed Reader 9 onto all our computers, so I'm not
  sure I can get rid of it, but at least now I know why I'm having that
  PDF in a browser problem.
 
  I posted this before, but just for completeness, I'm on Windows XP SP3
  and using Firefox 3.6.4 and IE 8.
 
  Fei Min Lorente
 
  -Original Message-
  From: framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com
  [mailto:framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of Dov Isaacs
  Sent: Saturday, July 24, 2010 11:39 PM
  To: Framers E-mail List
  Subject: RE: Acrobat 9 - a disaster
  Importance: High
 
  I heard my name used in vain (if not on-line!).
  In terms of Alison's original posting ...
 
  The symptoms you describe with regards to Acrobat 9 are not standard
  Acrobat 9 behaviour. You did not post exactly what Windows and/or
  browser versions you are using, but we currently are unaware of any
  normal situation that would yield the symptoms you describe.
 
  I open PDF files in browser windows on a regular basis with Acrobat 9
  with no problems whatsoever. Likewise, when I click on a URL in a PDF
  file while in Acrobat 9, I get to the website in a browser window.
 
  The only way you can get what you describe as a PDFised version of
  the web page would be if you opened invoked Create PDF=From Web Page
  (Shift-CTRL-O) and that PDF would not be in a browser window. When you
  click on a URL, Acrobat 9 normally prompts you as to whether to allow
  you to open the web page (via a browser) or to block the access to the
  web site. It NEVER creates a PDF file via clicking on a URL unless you
  right-click on a URL and explicitly choose Append to Document or
  Open Weblink as New Document. There are no options or program
  preferences
  which contravene this behaviour.
 
  Any attempt to try diagnosing what's happening on your system would be
  at best wild speculation but it would almost seem like there might be
  competing PDF readers/processors concurrently installed on your
  system.
  Be aware that Adobe does not support concurrent installation of multiple
 
  versions of Acrobat on a single system (such as Acrobat 8 and Acrobat 9
  installed at the same time). Adobe does not recommend concurrent
  installation of the same versions of both Reader and Acrobat on a system
  (such as Acrobat 9 and Reader installed at the same time) or even worse
  differing versions of both Reader and Acrobat on a system (such as
  Acrobat 9 and Reader 8 installed at the same time). Even more so, we
  certainly cannot vouch for what will happen if you have Acrobat or
  Reader
  plus some other third party PDF reader or creator concurrently
  installed.
  If you even have an inkling of how these programs integrate with drivers
 
  and the browser(s) under Window, you will understand the chaos that such
  mixtures of programs may engender to your system.
 
  So, as a start, I would look at ALL the software installed on your
  system
  and assure that there is only ONE, repeat only ONE PDF processing
  program
  on your computer. If your system is clean in this regard, you might
  try
  totally uninstalling any remaining version of Acrobat / Reader on your
  system and then run a registry cleaner utility program to assure that
  fragments of some previously installed stuff is truly eradicated from
  your system. Then after rebooting, try installing Acrobat 9 from scratch
 
  and see if that makes a difference.
 
  If that doesn't help, please advise. Likewise, if this does resolve you
  problem, likewise let us know. Good luck!
 
         - Dov
___


You are currently subscribed to framers as arch...@mail-archive.com.

Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank

RE: Acrobat 9 - a disaster

[Dov Isaacs]

Installing Acrobat does NOT install Reader. Adobe Reader is a program
that is a subset of Adobe Acrobat simply for displaying PDF files plus
providing support for a number of other PDF file operations.

Installing Adobe Acrobat installs a viewer (the program called Acrobat)
which is a superset of the functions of Adobe Reader. It also installs
PDF creation software including Acrobat Distiller (a legacy method of
producing PDF by converting PostScript to PDF) and the PDFMaker modules
for other applications including Microsoft Office.

In terms of the ability to see PDFs like they do, having Adobe Reader
on the same system as Adobe Acrobat is not going to assist you. In terms
of proper engineering and QA discipline, such testing should occur on a
system that has only the operating system installed, no extra fonts
installed, and Adobe Reader set with all default options. Otherwise, your
tests are somewhat polluted by your environment.

FWIW, in my many years of experience in creating PDF files and distributing
them around the world, I never once found a need to test the files with
Reader. With only one exception have any recipients of my PDF files ever
had any problems and that exception has been when the recipients tried to
view the PDF files with the MacOS Preview application. (MacOS Preview is
known to be a fairly poor PDF viewer not fully and properly implementing
the PDF specification although it loads quickly!)

- Dov

 -Original Message-
 From: Steve Johnson [mailto:chinask...@gmail.com]
 Sent: Sunday, July 25, 2010 7:37 AM
 To: Dov Isaacs
 Cc: Framers E-mail List
 Subject: Re: Acrobat 9 - a disaster
 
 Since when? Is that by design or by accident? Doesn't installing
 Acrobat also install Reader?
 
 How many of my users have Acrobat installed? Of course I want Reader
 installed so I can see PDFs like they do.
 
 On Sun, Jul 25, 2010 at 9:23 AM, Dov Isaacs isa...@adobe.com wrote:
  Although you CAN have both Reader and Acrobat installed simultaneously
  (assuming the same version), it is very strongly NOT RECOMMENDED for a
  number of very good reasons. It certainly does not add any functionality
  to one's system. Having said that, I will add that having both Reader and
  Acrobat of the same version on a system is most unlikely to cause the
  symptoms described.
 
         - Dov
___


You are currently subscribed to framers as arch...@mail-archive.com.

Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

RE: Acrobat 9 - a disaster

[Dov Isaacs]

Art,

Please see my the reply I just sent to a another response along
the same line.

I know of know of no way to make such a portable app for better
or worse. I'm not saying there isn't, I'm just not aware of it.

- Dov



 -Original Message-
 From: Art Campbell [mailto:art.campb...@gmail.com]
 Sent: Sunday, July 25, 2010 7:55 AM
 To: Dov Isaacs
 Cc: Framers E-mail List
 Subject: Re: Acrobat 9 - a disaster
 
 Dov,
 
 Although this takes the thread off-topic a bit, is there any way to
 configure Reader to be a portable ap that runs from a thumb drive?
 
 I certainly don't disagree with your advice about not having Reader on
 an Acrobat system, but for many of us that isn't possible -- for
 example, if you work in a typical office, you probably use Acrobat as
 your default PDF product, but you still have to have the capability to
 test those PDFs in Reader. But if you only have one system.
 
 Cheers,
 Art
 
 Art Campbell
                art.campb...@gmail.com
   ... In my opinion, there's nothing in this world beats a '52
 Vincent and a redheaded girl. -- Richard Thompson
                                                       No disclaimers apply.
                                                                DoD 358
 
 
 
 On Sun, Jul 25, 2010 at 10:23 AM, Dov Isaacs isa...@adobe.com wrote:
  Although you CAN have both Reader and Acrobat installed simultaneously
  (assuming the same version), it is very strongly NOT RECOMMENDED for a
  number of very good reasons. It certainly does not add any functionality
  to one's system. Having said that, I will add that having both Reader and
  Acrobat of the same version on a system is most unlikely to cause the
  symptoms described.
 
         - Dov
___


You are currently subscribed to framers as arch...@mail-archive.com.

Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

RE: Acrobat 9 - a disaster

[Dov Isaacs]

Guy,

See previous responses. Yes, there are UI differences between
Acrobat and Reader, but unless you are invoking rather complex
Javascript routines that invoke functions that are allowed in
Acrobat but not Reader, other than font issues (you should NEVER,
repeat NEVER, repeat once again NEVER generate PDF files with
unembedded fonts), you should not see any real differences between
rendering in Acrobat versus Reader - and the font issue itself
would mean that you need to run in a separate environment to gauge
the effects of unembedded fonts.

- Dov

 -Original Message-
 From: Guy K. Haas [mailto:g...@hiskeyboard.com]
 Sent: Sunday, July 25, 2010 7:57 AM
 To: Dov Isaacs
 Cc: Framers E-mail List
 Subject: Re: Acrobat 9 - a disaster
 
 But, Dov---
 
 I have both installed so that when a reviewer runs into a problem, I can
 see it their way.  The interfaces of the two are so different that
 it's sometimes handy to be able to do this.
 
 Would it be any less NOT RECOMMENDED if one had the Reader on a
 removable drive (such as a USB drive) and plugged it in only when needed?
 
 --Guy K. Haas
Software Exegete in Silicon Valley
 
 
 On 7/25/2010 7:23 AM, Dov Isaacs wrote:
  Although you CAN have both Reader and Acrobat installed simultaneously
  (assuming the same version), it is very strongly NOT RECOMMENDED for a
  number of very good reasons. It certainly does not add any functionality
  to one's system. Having said that, I will add that having both Reader and
  Acrobat of the same version on a system is most unlikely to cause the
  symptoms described.
 
  - Dov
 

___


You are currently subscribed to framers as arch...@mail-archive.com.

Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

Discussion of Acrobat Reader Concurrent Installation (Was: Acrobat 9 - a disaster)

[Dov Isaacs]

Steve,

I never said that Adobe says you should not install the same version
of Reader and Acrobat on the same system. That does not exist as an
official recommendation from either Adobe Technical Support or from the
Acrobat development organization. Having said that, as THE person within 
Adobe who deals with more of these PDF publishing workflow issues 
(producing, viewing, manipulating, and printing PDF files) than anyone 
else (since Acrobat 1.0) within Adobe and most anyone else in the industry,
I do believe that it is my responsibility to the end user community to 
share my experiences and recommendations.

No one is forcing you to accept my recommendations and you don't have to
accept my credentials for making those recommendations. And as I previously
mentioned, I don't believe that a concurrent installation of Acrobat
and Reader of the same version are the cause of the OP's originally-
described problem. But don't fool yourself into thinking that you are
doing any more due diligence in terms of testing a PDF file by opening
it on the same system in Reader as you created on with Acrobat.

And FWIW, the fact that the Acrobat and Reader installers don't prohibit
concurrent installation of Acrobat and Reader of the same version doesn't
mean that it is prudent or that I support it. My recommendations to the
Acrobat group over the years have been to disallow such installation; my
recommendations to you, the end users, is not to do such installations - I
have been very consistent about this particular issue. (And there are
a number of other issues where rational recommendations that I make that
would improve your use of Acrobat are not acted upon by the Acrobat group.
For good example of this - there is no good reason why the Standard 
joboptions of Acrobat exempt certain system fonts from being embedded 
in PDF files; that causes all sorts of problems later in workflows. One of
the first things I do after installation of Acrobat is to fix the system
permissions and modify the Standard joboptions to much more rational
settings. Note that Acrobat's web capture and Outlook PDF conversion do
not give you a choice as to which joboptions to use - they always use
Standard and thus, you'd better fix them if you want usable results!)

- Dov

 -Original Message-
 From: Steve Johnson [mailto:chinask...@gmail.com]
 Sent: Sunday, July 25, 2010 11:10 AM
 To: Dov Isaacs
 Cc: Framers E-mail List
 Subject: Re: Acrobat 9 - a disaster
 
 Show me in writing where Adobe says you should not install the same
 version of Reader and Acrobat on the same system. I cannot find it.
 It's not on the download page of either product, which is where it
 should be. All I can find is info saying you should not install two
 different versions of the same product.
 
 Even though you're an authority, all I have seen is unsupported
 statements like this saying I heard that Adobe says you should not do
 this but where is the statement against it saying why not? And if
 it's so dadgum important, why do the two products allow themselves to
 be installed side by side?
 
 For several versions now, you cannot run both Acrobat and Reader at
 the same time. I think you're right that Acrobat doesn't install
 Reader. I must have done the Reader install separately.
 
 The thing about wanting both Reader and Pro because of print/view
 differences is a few versions old but I remember there being
 situations in the past where viewing and printing with each product
 had differences.
 
 On Sun, Jul 25, 2010 at 12:33 PM, Dov Isaacs isa...@adobe.com wrote:
  Guy,
 
  See previous responses. Yes, there are UI differences between
  Acrobat and Reader, but unless you are invoking rather complex
  Javascript routines that invoke functions that are allowed in
  Acrobat but not Reader, other than font issues (you should NEVER,
  repeat NEVER, repeat once again NEVER generate PDF files with
  unembedded fonts), you should not see any real differences between
  rendering in Acrobat versus Reader - and the font issue itself
  would mean that you need to run in a separate environment to gauge
  the effects of unembedded fonts.
 
         - Dov
 
  -Original Message-
  From: Guy K. Haas [mailto:g...@hiskeyboard.com]
  Sent: Sunday, July 25, 2010 7:57 AM
  To: Dov Isaacs
  Cc: Framers E-mail List
  Subject: Re: Acrobat 9 - a disaster
 
  But, Dov---
 
  I have both installed so that when a reviewer runs into a problem, I can
  see it their way.  The interfaces of the two are so different that
  it's sometimes handy to be able to do this.
 
  Would it be any less NOT RECOMMENDED if one had the Reader on a
  removable drive (such as a USB drive) and plugged it in only when needed?
 
  --Guy K. Haas
     Software Exegete in Silicon Valley
 
 
  On 7/25/2010 7:23 AM, Dov Isaacs wrote:
   Although you CAN have both Reader and Acrobat installed simultaneously
   (assuming the same version), it is very strongly NOT RECOMMENDED for a
   number of very

Acrobat 9 - a disaster

[Dov Isaacs]

Although you CAN have both Reader and Acrobat installed simultaneously
(assuming the same version), it is very strongly NOT RECOMMENDED for a
number of very good reasons. It certainly does not add any functionality
to one's system. Having said that, I will add that having both Reader and
Acrobat of the same version on a system is most unlikely to cause the
symptoms described.

- Dov

> -Original Message-
> From: Steve Johnson [mailto:chinaski69 at gmail.com]
> Sent: Sunday, July 25, 2010 7:19 AM
> To: Fei Min Lorente
> Cc: Dov Isaacs; Framers E-mail List
> Subject: Re: Acrobat 9 - a disaster
> 
> You CAN have Reader and Acrobat at the same time. You CANNOT have two
> Acrobats; IOW, two PDF creators.
> 
> On Sun, Jul 25, 2010 at 8:14 AM, Fei Min Lorente
>  wrote:
> > Thanks, Dov! I was experiencing the same problem as Alison, insofar as
> > my browser would crash when I tried to look at a PDF in it (just
> > clicking on a URL). We ended up working around it by setting the Acrobat
> > internet preferences to not display PDF in browser. But now that you
> > mention that you can't even have Reader and Acrobat installed at the
> > same time, I noticed that I have Adobe Reader 9 as well as Adobe Acrobat
> > 9 Pro. Our company pushed Reader 9 onto all our computers, so I'm not
> > sure I can get rid of it, but at least now I know why I'm having that
> > PDF in a browser problem.
> >
> > I posted this before, but just for completeness, I'm on Windows XP SP3
> > and using Firefox 3.6.4 and IE 8.
> >
> > Fei Min Lorente
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com
> > [mailto:framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of Dov Isaacs
> > Sent: Saturday, July 24, 2010 11:39 PM
> > To: Framers E-mail List
> > Subject: RE: Acrobat 9 - a disaster
> > Importance: High
> >
> > I heard my name used in vain (if not on-line!).
> > In terms of Alison's original posting ...
> >
> > The symptoms you describe with regards to Acrobat 9 are not standard
> > Acrobat 9 behaviour. You did not post exactly what Windows and/or
> > browser versions you are using, but we currently are unaware of any
> > normal situation that would yield the symptoms you describe.
> >
> > I open PDF files in browser windows on a regular basis with Acrobat 9
> > with no problems whatsoever. Likewise, when I click on a URL in a PDF
> > file while in Acrobat 9, I get to the website in a browser window.
> >
> > The only way you can get what you describe as a "PDFised version of
> > the web page" would be if you opened invoked "Create PDF=>From Web Page"
> > (Shift-CTRL-O) and that PDF would not be in a browser window. When you
> > click on a URL, Acrobat 9 normally prompts you as to whether to allow
> > you to open the web page (via a browser) or to block the access to the
> > web site. It NEVER creates a PDF file via clicking on a URL unless you
> > right-click on a URL and explicitly choose "Append to Document" or
> > "Open Weblink as New Document." There are no options or program
> > preferences
> > which contravene this behaviour.
> >
> > Any attempt to try diagnosing what's happening on your system would be
> > at best wild speculation but it would almost seem like there might be
> > "competing" PDF readers/processors concurrently installed on your
> > system.
> > Be aware that Adobe does not support concurrent installation of multiple
> >
> > versions of Acrobat on a single system (such as Acrobat 8 and Acrobat 9
> > installed at the same time). Adobe does not recommend concurrent
> > installation of the same versions of both Reader and Acrobat on a system
> > (such as Acrobat 9 and Reader installed at the same time) or even worse
> > differing versions of both Reader and Acrobat on a system (such as
> > Acrobat 9 and Reader 8 installed at the same time). Even more so, we
> > certainly cannot vouch for what will happen if you have Acrobat or
> > Reader
> > plus some other third party PDF reader or creator concurrently
> > installed.
> > If you even have an inkling of how these programs integrate with drivers
> >
> > and the browser(s) under Window, you will understand the chaos that such
> > mixtures of programs may engender to your system.
> >
> > So, as a start, I would look at ALL the software installed on your
> > system
> > and assure that there is only ONE, repeat only ONE PDF processing
> > program
> > on your computer. If your system is "clean" in this regard, you might
> > try
> > totally uninstalling any remaining version of Acrobat / Reader on your
> > system and then run a registry cleaner utility program to assure that
> > fragments of some previously installed "stuff" is truly eradicated from
> > your system. Then after rebooting, try installing Acrobat 9 from scratch
> >
> > and see if that makes a difference.
> >
> > If that doesn't help, please advise. Likewise, if this does resolve you
> > problem, likewise let us know. Good luck!
> >
> > ? ? ? ?- Dov

Acrobat 9 - a disaster

[Dov Isaacs]

Installing Acrobat does NOT install Reader. Adobe Reader is a program
that is a subset of Adobe Acrobat simply for displaying PDF files plus
providing support for a number of other PDF file operations.

Installing Adobe Acrobat installs a "viewer" (the program called "Acrobat")
which is a superset of the functions of Adobe Reader. It also installs
PDF creation software including Acrobat Distiller (a legacy method of
producing PDF by converting PostScript to PDF) and the PDFMaker modules
for other applications including Microsoft Office.

In terms of the ability to "see PDFs like they do," having Adobe Reader
on the same system as Adobe Acrobat is not going to assist you. In terms
of proper engineering and QA discipline, such testing should occur on a
system that has only the operating system installed, no "extra fonts"
installed, and Adobe Reader set with all default options. Otherwise, your
tests are somewhat polluted by your environment.

FWIW, in my many years of experience in creating PDF files and distributing
them around the world, I never once found a need to test the files with
Reader. With only one exception have any recipients of my PDF files ever
had any problems and that exception has been when the recipients tried to
view the PDF files with the MacOS Preview application. (MacOS Preview is
known to be a fairly poor PDF viewer not fully and properly implementing
the PDF specification although it "loads" quickly!)

- Dov

> -Original Message-
> From: Steve Johnson [mailto:chinaski69 at gmail.com]
> Sent: Sunday, July 25, 2010 7:37 AM
> To: Dov Isaacs
> Cc: Framers E-mail List
> Subject: Re: Acrobat 9 - a disaster
> 
> Since when? Is that by design or by accident? Doesn't installing
> Acrobat also install Reader?
> 
> How many of my users have Acrobat installed? Of course I want Reader
> installed so I can see PDFs like they do.
> 
> On Sun, Jul 25, 2010 at 9:23 AM, Dov Isaacs  wrote:
> > Although you CAN have both Reader and Acrobat installed simultaneously
> > (assuming the same version), it is very strongly NOT RECOMMENDED for a
> > number of very good reasons. It certainly does not add any functionality
> > to one's system. Having said that, I will add that having both Reader and
> > Acrobat of the same version on a system is most unlikely to cause the
> > symptoms described.
> >
> > ? ? ? ?- Dov

Acrobat 9 - a disaster

[Dov Isaacs]

Art,

Please see my the reply I just sent to a another response along
the same line.

I know of know of no way to make such a "portable app" for better
or worse. I'm not saying there isn't, I'm just not aware of it.

- Dov



> -Original Message-
> From: Art Campbell [mailto:art.campbell at gmail.com]
> Sent: Sunday, July 25, 2010 7:55 AM
> To: Dov Isaacs
> Cc: Framers E-mail List
> Subject: Re: Acrobat 9 - a disaster
> 
> Dov,
> 
> Although this takes the thread off-topic a bit, is there any way to
> configure Reader to be a "portable" ap that runs from a thumb drive?
> 
> I certainly don't disagree with your advice about not having Reader on
> an Acrobat system, but for many of us that isn't possible -- for
> example, if you work in a typical office, you probably use Acrobat as
> your default PDF product, but you still have to have the capability to
> test those PDFs in Reader. But if you only have one system.
> 
> Cheers,
> Art
> 
> Art Campbell
>  ? ? ? ? ? ? ? art.campbell at gmail.com
> ? "... In my opinion, there's nothing in this world beats a '52
> Vincent and a redheaded girl." -- Richard Thompson
> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? No disclaimers apply.
> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?? DoD 358
> 
> 
> 
> On Sun, Jul 25, 2010 at 10:23 AM, Dov Isaacs  wrote:
> > Although you CAN have both Reader and Acrobat installed simultaneously
> > (assuming the same version), it is very strongly NOT RECOMMENDED for a
> > number of very good reasons. It certainly does not add any functionality
> > to one's system. Having said that, I will add that having both Reader and
> > Acrobat of the same version on a system is most unlikely to cause the
> > symptoms described.
> >
> > ? ? ? ?- Dov

Acrobat 9 - a disaster

[Dov Isaacs]

Guy,

See previous responses. Yes, there are UI differences between
Acrobat and Reader, but unless you are invoking rather complex
Javascript routines that invoke functions that are allowed in
Acrobat but not Reader, other than font issues (you should NEVER,
repeat NEVER, repeat once again NEVER generate PDF files with
unembedded fonts), you should not see any real differences between
rendering in Acrobat versus Reader - and the font issue itself
would mean that you need to run in a separate environment to gauge
the effects of unembedded fonts.

- Dov

> -Original Message-
> From: Guy K. Haas [mailto:guy at hiskeyboard.com]
> Sent: Sunday, July 25, 2010 7:57 AM
> To: Dov Isaacs
> Cc: Framers E-mail List
> Subject: Re: Acrobat 9 - a disaster
> 
> But, Dov---
> 
> I have both installed so that when a reviewer runs into a problem, I can
> "see it their way".  The interfaces of the two are so different that
> it's sometimes handy to be able to do this.
> 
> Would it be any less "NOT RECOMMENDED" if one had the Reader on a
> removable drive (such as a USB drive) and plugged it in only when needed?
> 
> --Guy K. Haas
>Software Exegete in Silicon Valley
> 
> 
> On 7/25/2010 7:23 AM, Dov Isaacs wrote:
> > Although you CAN have both Reader and Acrobat installed simultaneously
> > (assuming the same version), it is very strongly NOT RECOMMENDED for a
> > number of very good reasons. It certainly does not add any functionality
> > to one's system. Having said that, I will add that having both Reader and
> > Acrobat of the same version on a system is most unlikely to cause the
> > symptoms described.
> >
> > - Dov
> 

Discussion of Acrobat & Reader Concurrent Installation (Was: Acrobat 9 - a disaster)

[Dov Isaacs]

Steve,

I never said that "Adobe says you should not install the same version
of Reader and Acrobat on the same system." That does not exist as an
official recommendation from either Adobe Technical Support or from the
Acrobat development organization. Having said that, as THE person within 
Adobe who deals with more of these PDF publishing workflow issues 
(producing, viewing, manipulating, and printing PDF files) than anyone 
else (since Acrobat 1.0) within Adobe and most anyone else in the industry,
I do believe that it is my responsibility to the end user community to 
share my experiences and recommendations.

No one is forcing you to accept my recommendations and you don't have to
accept my credentials for making those recommendations. And as I previously
mentioned, I don't believe that a concurrent installation of Acrobat
and Reader of the same version are the cause of the OP's originally-
described problem. But don't fool yourself into thinking that you are
doing any more due diligence in terms of testing a PDF file by opening
it on the same system in Reader as you created on with Acrobat.

And FWIW, the fact that the Acrobat and Reader installers don't prohibit
concurrent installation of Acrobat and Reader of the same version doesn't
mean that it is prudent or that I support it. My recommendations to the
Acrobat group over the years have been to disallow such installation; my
recommendations to you, the end users, is not to do such installations - I
have been very consistent about this particular issue. (And there are
a number of other issues where rational recommendations that I make that
would improve your use of Acrobat are not acted upon by the Acrobat group.
For good example of this - there is no good reason why the "Standard" 
joboptions of Acrobat exempt certain "system fonts" from being embedded 
in PDF files; that causes all sorts of problems later in workflows. One of
the first things I do after installation of Acrobat is to fix the system
permissions and modify the "Standard" joboptions to much more rational
settings. Note that Acrobat's web capture and Outlook PDF conversion do
not give you a choice as to which joboptions to use - they always use
"Standard" and thus, you'd better fix them if you want usable results!)

- Dov

> -Original Message-
> From: Steve Johnson [mailto:chinaski69 at gmail.com]
> Sent: Sunday, July 25, 2010 11:10 AM
> To: Dov Isaacs
> Cc: Framers E-mail List
> Subject: Re: Acrobat 9 - a disaster
> 
> Show me in writing where Adobe says you should not install the same
> version of Reader and Acrobat on the same system. I cannot find it.
> It's not on the download page of either product, which is where it
> should be. All I can find is info saying you should not install two
> different versions of the same product.
> 
> Even though you're an authority, all I have seen is unsupported
> statements like this saying "I heard that Adobe says you should not do
> this" but where is the statement against it saying why not? And if
> it's so dadgum important, why do the two products allow themselves to
> be installed side by side?
> 
> For several versions now, you cannot run both Acrobat and Reader at
> the same time. I think you're right that Acrobat doesn't install
> Reader. I must have done the Reader install separately.
> 
> The thing about wanting both Reader and Pro because of print/view
> differences is a few versions old but I remember there being
> situations in the past where viewing and printing with each product
> had differences.
> 
> On Sun, Jul 25, 2010 at 12:33 PM, Dov Isaacs  wrote:
> > Guy,
> >
> > See previous responses. Yes, there are UI differences between
> > Acrobat and Reader, but unless you are invoking rather complex
> > Javascript routines that invoke functions that are allowed in
> > Acrobat but not Reader, other than font issues (you should NEVER,
> > repeat NEVER, repeat once again NEVER generate PDF files with
> > unembedded fonts), you should not see any real differences between
> > rendering in Acrobat versus Reader - and the font issue itself
> > would mean that you need to run in a separate environment to gauge
> > the effects of unembedded fonts.
> >
> > ? ? ? ?- Dov
> >
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: Guy K. Haas [mailto:guy at hiskeyboard.com]
> >> Sent: Sunday, July 25, 2010 7:57 AM
> >> To: Dov Isaacs
> >> Cc: Framers E-mail List
> >> Subject: Re: Acrobat 9 - a disaster
> >>
> >> But, Dov---
> >>
> >> I have both installed so that when a reviewer runs into a problem, I can
> >> "see it their way". ?The interfaces of the two are so different that
> >> it's sometim

RE: Acrobat 9 - a disaster

[Dov Isaacs]

I heard my name used in vain (if not on-line!).
In terms of Alison's original posting ...

The symptoms you describe with regards to Acrobat 9 are not standard 
Acrobat 9 behaviour. You did not post exactly what Windows and/or 
browser versions you are using, but we currently are unaware of any 
normal situation that would yield the symptoms you describe.

I open PDF files in browser windows on a regular basis with Acrobat 9
with no problems whatsoever. Likewise, when I click on a URL in a PDF
file while in Acrobat 9, I get to the website in a browser window.

The only way you can get what you describe as a PDFised version of 
the web page would be if you opened invoked Create PDF=From Web Page
(Shift-CTRL-O) and that PDF would not be in a browser window. When you 
click on a URL, Acrobat 9 normally prompts you as to whether to allow 
you to open the web page (via a browser) or to block the access to the 
web site. It NEVER creates a PDF file via clicking on a URL unless you 
right-click on a URL and explicitly choose Append to Document or 
Open Weblink as New Document. There are no options or program preferences
which contravene this behaviour.

Any attempt to try diagnosing what's happening on your system would be 
at best wild speculation but it would almost seem like there might be 
competing PDF readers/processors concurrently installed on your system. 
Be aware that Adobe does not support concurrent installation of multiple 
versions of Acrobat on a single system (such as Acrobat 8 and Acrobat 9 
installed at the same time). Adobe does not recommend concurrent 
installation of the same versions of both Reader and Acrobat on a system
(such as Acrobat 9 and Reader installed at the same time) or even worse 
differing versions of both Reader and Acrobat on a system (such as 
Acrobat 9 and Reader 8 installed at the same time). Even more so, we 
certainly cannot vouch for what will happen if you have Acrobat or Reader
plus some other third party PDF reader or creator concurrently installed. 
If you even have an inkling of how these programs integrate with drivers 
and the browser(s) under Window, you will understand the chaos that such
mixtures of programs may engender to your system.

So, as a start, I would look at ALL the software installed on your system 
and assure that there is only ONE, repeat only ONE PDF processing program 
on your computer. If your system is clean in this regard, you might try 
totally uninstalling any remaining version of Acrobat / Reader on your 
system and then run a registry cleaner utility program to assure that
fragments of some previously installed stuff is truly eradicated from 
your system. Then after rebooting, try installing Acrobat 9 from scratch 
and see if that makes a difference.

If that doesn't help, please advise. Likewise, if this does resolve you
problem, likewise let us know. Good luck!

- Dov


 -Original Message-
 From: Alan T Litchfield
 Sent: Saturday, July 24, 2010 1:36 PM
 To: dr_go...@pobox.com
 Cc: framers@lists.frameusers.com; Alison White
 
 hmm yes.
 
 No point in complaining here. There are a few Adobe people but they
 would have interest mostly in FrameMaker, except Dov.
 
 I might also suggest you get in touch with Adobe Customer care if you
 have a corporate license. Oh and don't expect anyone here to forward
 your complaint for you.
 
 Cheers
 Alan
 
 On 24/07/2010, at 1:34 AM, Steve Johnson wrote:
 
  You should post this on the Adobe forum.
 
  In the paragraph With Acrobat 9, I cannot... have you tried
  distilling using Acrobat 6 or 7 compatibility?
 
  On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 3:19 AM, Alison White
  aliwh...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
  I've just upgraded to Acrobat 9 and regret the decision. Not sure how to
  post my complaints, so {sorry}. If you can on-forward, I'd be grateful.
 
  With Acrobat 9, I cannot open a pdf inside any mainstream browser without 
  it
  (Acrobat + browser) failing completely (zilch). To get anything to happen I
  have to set browser preferences to not open Acrobat in the browser.
 
  Then, within my pdfs, my www.links don't open a default browser window
  anymore (as expected) - instead I get a long-winded pdfised version of the
  web page (definitely NOT required)!!!
 
  What the ? is going on?
 
  I'm not sure how to complain - but this is really NOT GOOD - I am about to
  abandon ANY idea of pdf, including LIVECYCLE FORMS, as a viable enterprise
  option.
 
  Back to 8 with ABSOLUTELY NO LINKS TO AN UPGARDE OFFERED.
___


You are currently subscribed to framers as arch...@mail-archive.com.

Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

Acrobat 9 - a disaster

[Dov Isaacs]

I heard my name used in vain (if not on-line!).
In terms of Alison's original posting ...

The symptoms you describe with regards to Acrobat 9 are not standard 
Acrobat 9 behaviour. You did not post exactly what Windows and/or 
browser versions you are using, but we currently are unaware of any 
normal situation that would yield the symptoms you describe.

I open PDF files in browser windows on a regular basis with Acrobat 9
with no problems whatsoever. Likewise, when I click on a URL in a PDF
file while in Acrobat 9, I get to the website in a browser window.

The only way you can get what you describe as a "PDFised version of 
the web page" would be if you opened invoked "Create PDF=>From Web Page"
(Shift-CTRL-O) and that PDF would not be in a browser window. When you 
click on a URL, Acrobat 9 normally prompts you as to whether to allow 
you to open the web page (via a browser) or to block the access to the 
web site. It NEVER creates a PDF file via clicking on a URL unless you 
right-click on a URL and explicitly choose "Append to Document" or 
"Open Weblink as New Document." There are no options or program preferences
which contravene this behaviour.

Any attempt to try diagnosing what's happening on your system would be 
at best wild speculation but it would almost seem like there might be 
"competing" PDF readers/processors concurrently installed on your system. 
Be aware that Adobe does not support concurrent installation of multiple 
versions of Acrobat on a single system (such as Acrobat 8 and Acrobat 9 
installed at the same time). Adobe does not recommend concurrent 
installation of the same versions of both Reader and Acrobat on a system
(such as Acrobat 9 and Reader installed at the same time) or even worse 
differing versions of both Reader and Acrobat on a system (such as 
Acrobat 9 and Reader 8 installed at the same time). Even more so, we 
certainly cannot vouch for what will happen if you have Acrobat or Reader
plus some other third party PDF reader or creator concurrently installed. 
If you even have an inkling of how these programs integrate with drivers 
and the browser(s) under Window, you will understand the chaos that such
mixtures of programs may engender to your system.

So, as a start, I would look at ALL the software installed on your system 
and assure that there is only ONE, repeat only ONE PDF processing program 
on your computer. If your system is "clean" in this regard, you might try 
totally uninstalling any remaining version of Acrobat / Reader on your 
system and then run a registry cleaner utility program to assure that
fragments of some previously installed "stuff" is truly eradicated from 
your system. Then after rebooting, try installing Acrobat 9 from scratch 
and see if that makes a difference.

If that doesn't help, please advise. Likewise, if this does resolve you
problem, likewise let us know. Good luck!

- Dov


> -Original Message-
> From: Alan T Litchfield
> Sent: Saturday, July 24, 2010 1:36 PM
> To: dr_gonzo at pobox.com
> Cc: framers at lists.frameusers.com; Alison White
> 
> hmm yes.
> 
> No point in complaining here. There are a few Adobe people but they
> would have interest mostly in FrameMaker, except Dov.
> 
> I might also suggest you get in touch with Adobe Customer care if you
> have a corporate license. Oh and don't expect anyone here to forward
> your complaint for you.
> 
> Cheers
> Alan
> 
> On 24/07/2010, at 1:34 AM, Steve Johnson wrote:
> 
> > You should post this on the Adobe forum.
> >
> > In the paragraph "With Acrobat 9, I cannot..." have you tried
> > distilling using Acrobat 6 or 7 compatibility?
> >
> > On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 3:19 AM, Alison White
> >  wrote:
> >> I've just upgraded to Acrobat 9 and regret the decision. Not sure how to
> >> post my complaints, so {sorry}. If you can on-forward, I'd be grateful.
> >>
> >> With Acrobat 9, I cannot open a pdf inside any mainstream browser without 
> >> it
> >> (Acrobat + browser) failing completely (zilch). To get anything to happen I
> >> have to set browser preferences to not open Acrobat in the browser.
> >>
> >> Then, within my pdfs, my www.links don't open a default browser window
> >> anymore (as expected) - instead I get a long-winded pdfised version of the
> >> web page (definitely NOT required)!!!
> >>
> >> What the ? is going on?
> >>
> >> I'm not sure how to complain - but this is really NOT GOOD - I am about to
> >> abandon ANY idea of pdf, including LIVECYCLE FORMS, as a viable enterprise
> >> option.
> >>
> >> Back to 8 with ABSOLUTELY NO LINKS TO AN UPGARDE OFFERED.

Windows 7 and Frame 7.1

[Dov Isaacs]

FrameMaker 9 is a 32-bit program that will properly install and run under 
Windows Vista
and Windows 7 64-bit versions.

FrameMaker 7.1 is also a 32-bit program. Adobe does not officially support it 
under
Windows Vista or Windows 7, either 32-bit or 64-bit version. You may coerce it 
to install
and run in those environments, but YMMV and you are on your own for any support.

- Dov

> -Original Message-
> From: framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com [mailto:framers-bounces at 
> lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of
> Paul Kent
> Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2010 7:36 PM
> To: Framers; Framers
> Subject: Windows 7 and Frame 7.1
> 
> Looking at doing a (forced) computer upgrade and I seem to recall some 
> threads concerning this
> subject.
> 
> Am I correct in remembering that Frame 9 is 64-bit compliant, but Frame 7.1 
> is not?
> 
> 
> Thanks
> 
> J. Paul Kent
> 206-383-0539

RE: Acrobat v9 and FM v7.478 /7.579

[Dov Isaacs]

Diana,

There is no such thing as an Acrobat PDF v9 file. I will assume that you 
really
mean a PDF file generated via Acrobat 9.

I don't think that you are really encountering a problem with the fact that a 
file
may have been produced with Acrobat 9, but rather that the joboptions used to 
create
the PDF file exceed the import capabilities for PDF as it existed in the 
FrameMaker 7
timeframe.

FrameMaker 7 was released in 2002 (approximately 8 years ago). The current 
version of
Acrobat at that time was Acrobat 5 which supported PDF 1.4. FrameMaker 7 most 
likely
does not support import of PDF versions greater than PDF 1.4 (and probably not 
that
version particularly well, either!).

Recent versions of Acrobat and Adobe Creative Suite applications ship with 
predefined
joboptions that are set for either PDF 1.4 or PDF 1.5. PDF 1.5 supports 
internal PDF
object compressions and JPEG2000 image compressions not supported by PDF 1.4.

If you have a PDF file that won't import into FrameMaker, open same in Acrobat 
and
via CTRL-D, determine what PDF version it is. If PDF 1.5 or greater, it most 
likely
will not import into FrameMaker under any condition. Workaround is to either use
the tools in Acrobat to dumb down the file to PDF 1.4 or to save the file as EPS
files and import the EPS into FrameMaker.

Of course, you may want to update your 8-year old version of FrameMaker.

- Dov


 -Original Message-
 From: Diana Stock
 Sent: Wednesday, June 30, 2010 12:19 PM
 Subject: Acrobat v9 and FM v7.478 /7.579
 
 Hello all,
 
 Was wondering if anyone would know why I cannot import a Acrobat PDF v9 into 
 a FrameMaker v7.478 or
 v7.579 file.
 
 Are there any fixes for this or is FM 7 limited to Acrobat 8 PDF files for 
 import.
 
 XP Pro
 
 Thanks in advance,
 Diana Stock
 Maintenance Analyst
 214-792-2744
___


You are currently subscribed to framers as arch...@mail-archive.com.

Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

Acrobat v9 and FM v7.478 /7.579

[Dov Isaacs]

Diana,

There is no such thing as an "Acrobat PDF v9" file. I will assume that you 
really
mean a "PDF file generated via Acrobat 9."

I don't think that you are really encountering a problem with the fact that a 
file
may have been produced with Acrobat 9, but rather that the joboptions used to 
create
the PDF file exceed the import capabilities for PDF as it existed in the 
FrameMaker 7
timeframe.

FrameMaker 7 was released in 2002 (approximately 8 years ago). The current 
version of
Acrobat at that time was Acrobat 5 which supported PDF 1.4. FrameMaker 7 most 
likely
does not support import of PDF versions greater than PDF 1.4 (and probably not 
that
version particularly well, either!).

Recent versions of Acrobat and Adobe Creative Suite applications ship with 
predefined
joboptions that are set for either PDF 1.4 or PDF 1.5. PDF 1.5 supports 
internal PDF
object compressions and JPEG2000 image compressions not supported by PDF 1.4.

If you have a PDF file that won't import into FrameMaker, open same in Acrobat 
and
via CTRL-D, determine what PDF version it is. If PDF 1.5 or greater, it most 
likely
will not import into FrameMaker under any condition. Workaround is to either use
the tools in Acrobat to dumb down the file to PDF 1.4 or to save the file as EPS
files and import the EPS into FrameMaker.

Of course, you may want to update your 8-year old version of FrameMaker.

- Dov


> -Original Message-
> From: Diana Stock
> Sent: Wednesday, June 30, 2010 12:19 PM
> Subject: Acrobat v9 and FM v7.478 /7.579
> 
> Hello all,
> 
> Was wondering if anyone would know why I cannot import a Acrobat PDF v9 into 
> a FrameMaker v7.478 or
> v7.579 file.
> 
> Are there any fixes for this or is FM 7 limited to Acrobat 8 PDF files for 
> import.
> 
> XP Pro
> 
> Thanks in advance,
> Diana Stock
> Maintenance Analyst
> 214-792-2744

RE: Acrobat 9 Frustrations...

[Dov Isaacs]

Whatever problem you are experiencing has nothing to do with Windows 7 or 
Acrobat 9, but 
probably relates to problems with FrameMaker 8.

For the record, the hotfix is for Windows XP and Vista only. Windows 7 
already is fixed for
the issues for which the hotfix applied. Furthermore, the issue was NOT the 
PostScript driver,
but rather, the internal GDI graphics subsystem in Windows that had some 
problems associated
with font handling and caching.

Unfortunately, I do not know exactly what the problem was with FrameMaker 8, 
but there
were any number of issues associated with printing and PDF production from 
FrameMaker 8.

- Dov


 -Original Message-
 From: framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com 
 [mailto:framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of
 Chris Despopoulos
 Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2010 12:24 PM
 To: framers@lists.frameusers.com
 Subject: Acrobat 9 Frustrations...
 
 Yet again.
 
 I know this has been discussed, but I can't seem to find it in my searches.
 
 I have FrameMaker 8 and Acrobat 9 Pro.  I'm trying to move over to a Windows 
 7 machine.  I have
 replicated my original setup that worked on my XP machine.  But now when I 
 try to save a book as PDF,
 I get an OffendingCommand error and no PDF is generated.  I can generate PDF 
 for any single file in
 the book.  But I can't generate PDF for more than one file in the book.
 
 I know there was some MS HotFix out there for XP, WinServer, and Vista.  I 
 guess there was some memory
 problem where the PS printer drivers ran out of memory, unloaded fonts, and 
 did other bad things.  Is
 this the same problem, only now on Win 7?  Or is it just some compatibility 
 problem with FrameMaker 8
 and Acrobat 9?
 
 If anybody has any notion of what's happening, I'd be most thrilled.  I've 
 just been too busy to
 catalog all these issues as they go by.
 
 Thanks much...   cud
___


You are currently subscribed to framers as arch...@mail-archive.com.

Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

RE: Is it possible to Save As PDF from FrameMaker 9 using Acrobat 7 on Windows7?

[Dov Isaacs]

Acrobat 7 does not support any version of Windows beyond Windows XP
and certainly NOT any 64-bit version of Windows.

With all due respect, if you are considering upgrades of operating system
and hardware (such as more memory than can be supported by a 32-bit OS),
you should consider the FULL cost of such upgrades including any and all
applications you either explicitly or implicitly require.

With regards to generating reliable PDF files from FrameMaker 9 on
Windows 7, some ideas:

(1) FrameMaker 9 does come with a headless limited version
of Distiller 9 (you can't run it separately) that allows creation
of PDF via the save as PDF facility of FrameMaker 9. However,
you would need to uninstall Acrobat 7 if you want it to install
and work.

(2) Non-Adobe PDF creators will not integrate with FrameMaker
and typically have been known to create mediocre-at-best PDF.

- Dov

Adobe does NOT support CS2 on Windows 7. Only CS4 and CS5 are supported
on Windows 7.

 -Original Message-
 From: framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com 
 [mailto:framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of
 Ursula McCloy
 Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2010 10:17 AM
 To: framers@lists.frameusers.com
 Subject: Is it possible to Save As PDF from FrameMaker 9 using Acrobat 7 on 
 Windows7?
 
 Hi,
 
 We have recently upgraded to Windows7, 64-bit, and were also able to
 upgrade to FrameMaker9.  We have not yet committed to upgrading our
 Acrobat 7 licenses (bundled with CS2; to upgrade that is ~$700 - a tad
 steep for our tastes).
 
 While we are pleased with our FM9 upgrade in general, we are unable to
 SaveAsPDF, since the Acrobat PDF print driver does not appear to be
 installed.  Of course, we could print to file using another print
 driver, but that is not generally considered kosher, and can produce a
 whole slew of other problems (fonts, colours, etc.) that I do not want
 to wrangle with.
 * Has anyone been able to get the Acrobat7 PDF print driver to install
 on a Windows7 machine?
 * If so, is there a particular install sequence we need to follow? (I am
 pretty sure IT  remembered to install Acrobat after FrameMaker, but I
 can't tell for sure)
 * Are there any other options for generating reliable PDFs from
 FrameMaker9 on Windows7, other than upgrading to Acrobat9?
 * And (though this question is off topic) has anyone experienced any
 show stoppers with using CS2 Photoshop, Illustrator, or InDesign on
 Windows7?
 
 
 Thanks for any insights :).
 
 Ursula McCloy
 Information Developer
 The PEER Group Inc.
___


You are currently subscribed to framers as arch...@mail-archive.com.

Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

Acrobat 9 Frustrations...

[Dov Isaacs]

Whatever problem you are experiencing has nothing to do with Windows 7 or 
Acrobat 9, but 
probably relates to problems with FrameMaker 8.

For the record, the "hotfix" is for Windows XP and Vista only. Windows 7 
already is fixed for
the issues for which the hotfix applied. Furthermore, the issue was NOT the 
PostScript driver,
but rather, the internal GDI graphics subsystem in Windows that had some 
problems associated
with font handling and caching.

Unfortunately, I do not know exactly what the problem was with FrameMaker 8, 
but there
were any number of issues associated with printing and PDF production from 
FrameMaker 8.

- Dov


> -Original Message-
> From: framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com [mailto:framers-bounces at 
> lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of
> Chris Despopoulos
> Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2010 12:24 PM
> To: framers at lists.frameusers.com
> Subject: Acrobat 9 Frustrations...
> 
> Yet again.
> 
> I know this has been discussed, but I can't seem to find it in my searches.
> 
> I have FrameMaker 8 and Acrobat 9 Pro.  I'm trying to move over to a Windows 
> 7 machine.  I have
> replicated my original setup that worked on my XP machine.  But now when I 
> try to save a book as PDF,
> I get an OffendingCommand error and no PDF is generated.  I can generate PDF 
> for any single file in
> the book.  But I can't generate PDF for more than one file in the book.
> 
> I know there was some MS HotFix out there for XP, WinServer, and Vista.  I 
> guess there was some memory
> problem where the PS printer drivers ran out of memory, unloaded fonts, and 
> did other bad things.  Is
> this the same problem, only now on Win 7?  Or is it just some compatibility 
> problem with FrameMaker 8
> and Acrobat 9?
> 
> If anybody has any notion of what's happening, I'd be most thrilled.  I've 
> just been too busy to
> catalog all these issues as they go by.
> 
> Thanks much...   cud

Is it possible to Save As PDF from FrameMaker 9 using Acrobat 7 on Windows7?

[Dov Isaacs]

Acrobat 7 does not support any version of Windows beyond Windows XP
and certainly NOT any 64-bit version of Windows.

With all due respect, if you are considering upgrades of operating system
and hardware (such as more memory than can be supported by a 32-bit OS),
you should consider the FULL cost of such upgrades including any and all
applications you either explicitly or implicitly require.

With regards to "generating reliable PDF files from FrameMaker 9 on
Windows 7," some ideas:

(1) FrameMaker 9 does come with a headless limited version
of Distiller 9 (you can't run it separately) that allows creation
of PDF via the "save as PDF" facility of FrameMaker 9. However,
you would need to uninstall Acrobat 7 if you want it to install
and work.

(2) Non-Adobe PDF creators will not integrate with FrameMaker
and typically have been known to create mediocre-at-best PDF.

- Dov

Adobe does NOT support CS2 on Windows 7. Only CS4 and CS5 are supported
on Windows 7.

> -Original Message-
> From: framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com [mailto:framers-bounces at 
> lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of
> Ursula McCloy
> Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2010 10:17 AM
> To: framers at lists.frameusers.com
> Subject: Is it possible to Save As PDF from FrameMaker 9 using Acrobat 7 on 
> Windows7?
> 
> Hi,
> 
> We have recently upgraded to Windows7, 64-bit, and were also able to
> upgrade to FrameMaker9.  We have not yet committed to upgrading our
> Acrobat 7 licenses (bundled with CS2; to upgrade that is ~$700 - a tad
> steep for our tastes).
> 
> While we are pleased with our FM9 upgrade in general, we are unable to
> SaveAsPDF, since the Acrobat PDF print driver does not appear to be
> installed.  Of course, we could print to file using another print
> driver, but that is not generally considered kosher, and can produce a
> whole slew of other problems (fonts, colours, etc.) that I do not want
> to wrangle with.
> * Has anyone been able to get the Acrobat7 PDF print driver to install
> on a Windows7 machine?
> * If so, is there a particular install sequence we need to follow? (I am
> pretty sure IT  remembered to install Acrobat after FrameMaker, but I
> can't tell for sure)
> * Are there any other options for generating reliable PDFs from
> FrameMaker9 on Windows7, other than upgrading to Acrobat9?
> * And (though this question is off topic) has anyone experienced any
> show stoppers with using CS2 Photoshop, Illustrator, or InDesign on
> Windows7?
> 
> 
> Thanks for any insights :).
> 
> Ursula McCloy
> Information Developer
> The PEER Group Inc.

RE: Printing to PS and distilling to PDF question

[Dov Isaacs]

A few comments about this issue:

(1) The Adobe PDF PostScript printer driver instance used to create PDF
explicitly by printing or implicitly by the FrameMaker save as PDF
feature has a special option in its driver plug-in component labeled
Rely on system fonts only; do not use document fonts. This option is
accessed as follows from the Adobe PDF printer:

Adobe PDF=Properties=Advanced (tab)=Printing Defaults=
Adobe PDF Settings (tab)

as well as from:

Adobe PDF=Properties=General (tab)=Printing Preferences=
Adobe PDF Settings (tab)

Both of these areas need to be set the same way although usually, setting
via the Printing Defaults method sets the Printing Preferences (but don't
count on it!).

(2) The function of this option is (supposedly) very simple. If the
option is enabled, the driver does not put any fonts into the PostScript
stream to be distilled. Why is this important or useful? It turns out that
the PostScript generated by the Windows PostScript driver, PSCRIPT5, and
especially the inclusion of fonts in that PostScript stream, is optimized
for consumption by a PostScript printer, not for creation of PDF. The
driver includes incrementally downloaded font fragments which is not
optimal for the Distiller and could cause problems later in a workflow
when trying to merge PDF file fragments together. When this option is
checked on, the driver puts no fonts in the PostScript; the Distiller
itself finds the fonts and puts them into the PDF file in a more
cohesive, organized manner.

(3) There are situations, however, that cause problems The first of these
situation is when fonts are passed through to the driver by what is known
as the driver PostScript escape mechanism. This is the means by which
EPS (or by extension, PDF) placed in a FrameMaker document is passed through
the driver to the final PostScript stream and many such EPS (or PDF) files
have embedded fonts which are then encountered by the driver. In FrameMaker 9,
if you don't use the RGB option for the save as PDF feature, FrameMaker's
UNIX PostScript generator (the entity responsible for creating CMYK PostScript)
also embed fonts in the PostScript stream it in generating. In either case, if
the driver senses these fonts being passed through when the rely on system
fonts only option is enabled, it throws up (guess that's a good way of
putting it) the error message requiring you to turn off that option.

(4) The second problematic situation is that of applications that privately
install fonts. There are two examples of this. Microsoft Office application
documents have the ability to carry embedded TrueType and OpenType (TrueType
flavor only) fonts if and only if such fonts allow full embedability. When
Office applications open such documents, they privately install those
embedded fonts for your use while editing the document. Similarly, if you
try to print a font sample for a font that isn't installed on your system
(i.e., you double-click on a font icon and print from the font preview
presented by Windows), the font preview function temporarily privately installs
the font. The nasty however is that, privately installed fonts are passed 
through
Windows GDI and the driver (resulting in their embedding in the PostScript 
stream),
but cannot be seen by the Distiller which is run in a separate system process
and cannot access (or even know about) the privately installed fonts. In this
situation, you don't know what's going on until you get either a Distiller 
warning
or error (depending upon you joboptions).

(5) There is a known bug in the Acrobat updater that totally resets all your
printer settings for the Adobe PDF PostScript printer driver instance every
time you update Acrobat. These days, in order to stay ahead of the hackers, the
Acrobat group at Adobe has been issuing updates on an almost monthly basis which
means that every time you update Acrobat, you had better follow that with 
resetting
all the Adobe PDF settings to your own preference. That includes the default
joboptions used for the distillation process.

Clear as mud?

- Dov


 -Original Message-
 From: Tammy Van Boening
 Sent: Wednesday, March 03, 2010 6:07 AM
 To: framers@lists.frameusers.com; Free Framers
 Subject: Printing to PS and distilling to PDF question
 
 All,
 
 FM9 (all patched), Win7/64 bit system, Adobe Acrobat Pro 9. Several months
 ago, after upgrading to all the listed hardware/software, I started having
 issues with printing to PS and distilling the PS files to PDF using very
 staid, well-established files that had never given me issue before. I was
 receiving that contradictory message about Rely on system fonts only; do
 not use document fonts when I hadn't changed one thing about the fonts that
 I use in the documents (Arial and TNR only!) or what fonts were installed on
 my system (these two fonts are indeed installed.)
 
 Long story short - after some 

Printing to PS and distilling to PDF question

[Dov Isaacs]

A few comments about this issue:

(1) The Adobe PDF PostScript printer driver instance used to create PDF
explicitly by printing or implicitly by the FrameMaker "save as PDF"
feature has a special option in its "driver plug-in" component labeled
"Rely on system fonts only; do not use document fonts." This option is
accessed as follows from the "Adobe PDF" printer:

Adobe PDF=>Properties=>Advanced (tab)=>Printing Defaults=>
Adobe PDF Settings (tab)

as well as from:

Adobe PDF=>Properties=>General (tab)=>Printing Preferences=>
Adobe PDF Settings (tab)

Both of these areas need to be set the same way although usually, setting
via the Printing Defaults method sets the Printing Preferences (but don't
count on it!).

(2) The function of this option is (supposedly) very simple. If the
option is enabled, the driver does not put any fonts into the PostScript
stream to be distilled. Why is this important or useful? It turns out that
the PostScript generated by the Windows PostScript driver, PSCRIPT5, and
especially the inclusion of fonts in that PostScript stream, is optimized
for consumption by a PostScript printer, not for creation of PDF. The
driver includes incrementally downloaded font fragments which is not
optimal for the Distiller and could cause problems later in a workflow
when trying to merge PDF file fragments together. When this option is
checked on, the driver puts no fonts in the PostScript; the Distiller
itself finds the fonts and puts them into the PDF file in a more
cohesive, organized manner.

(3) There are situations, however, that cause problems The first of these
situation is when fonts are passed through to the driver by what is known
as the driver "PostScript escape mechanism." This is the means by which
EPS (or by extension, PDF) placed in a FrameMaker document is passed through
the driver to the final PostScript stream and many such EPS (or PDF) files
have embedded fonts which are then encountered by the driver. In FrameMaker 9,
if you don't use the RGB option for the "save as PDF" feature, FrameMaker's
UNIX PostScript generator (the entity responsible for creating CMYK PostScript)
also embed fonts in the PostScript stream it in generating. In either case, if
the driver senses these fonts being passed through when the "rely on system
fonts only" option is enabled, it throws up (guess that's a good way of
putting it) the error message requiring you to turn off that option.

(4) The second problematic situation is that of applications that privately
install fonts. There are two examples of this. Microsoft Office application
documents have the ability to carry embedded TrueType and OpenType (TrueType
flavor only) fonts if and only if such fonts allow full embedability. When
Office applications open such documents, they privately install those
embedded fonts for your use while editing the document. Similarly, if you
try to print a font sample for a font that isn't installed on your system
(i.e., you double-click on a font icon and print from the font preview
presented by Windows), the font preview function temporarily privately installs
the font. The nasty however is that, privately installed fonts are passed 
through
Windows GDI and the driver (resulting in their embedding in the PostScript 
stream),
but cannot be seen by the Distiller which is run in a separate system process
and cannot access (or even know about) the privately installed fonts. In this
situation, you don't know what's going on until you get either a Distiller 
warning
or error (depending upon you joboptions).

(5) There is a known bug in the Acrobat updater that totally resets all your
printer settings for the "Adobe PDF" PostScript printer driver instance every
time you update Acrobat. These days, in order to stay ahead of the hackers, the
Acrobat group at Adobe has been issuing updates on an almost monthly basis which
means that every time you update Acrobat, you had better follow that with 
resetting
all the "Adobe PDF" settings to your own preference. That includes the default
joboptions used for the distillation process.

Clear as mud?

- Dov


> -Original Message-
> From: Tammy Van Boening
> Sent: Wednesday, March 03, 2010 6:07 AM
> To: framers at lists.frameusers.com; Free Framers
> Subject: Printing to PS and distilling to PDF question
> 
> All,
> 
> FM9 (all patched), Win7/64 bit system, Adobe Acrobat Pro 9. Several months
> ago, after upgrading to all the listed hardware/software, I started having
> issues with printing to PS and distilling the PS files to PDF using very
> staid, well-established files that had never given me issue before. I was
> receiving that contradictory message about "Rely on system fonts only; do
> not use document fonts" when I hadn't changed one thing about the fonts that
> I use in the documents (Arial and TNR only!) or what fonts were installed on
> my system (these two fonts are indeed 

RE: Grayscale Images are RGB

[Dov Isaacs]

Two possibilities here ...

(1) Assuming you are using the RGB option for save as PDF or printing 
to the Adobe PDF
PostScript printer driver instance, except for images are in EPS format, all 
grayscale and
CMYK images imported into FrameMaker will come out as RGB. FrameMaker is a GDI 
application
except when NOT using the save as PDF without the RGB option.

(2) Many images that users THINK are grayscale are actually RGB. When using 
the various
options in Photoshop to convert a color image to black and white, unless you 
ALSO apply
the option to convert what looks like a grayscale image to actual grayscale, 
you will end
up with an RGB image in which for every pixel R=G=B in value.

R=G=B grayscale RGB images typically do not properly print with only the K 
(black) channel
on most devices and/or with most drivers.

So, UNFORTUNATELY, with FrameMaker you have two options, both assuming that the 
image really
is grayscale and not an R=G=B RGB image:

The first option is to use save as PDF and don't select the RGB option. This 
only works for
FrameMaker 9 and may be problematic if you run into one of the bugs associated 
with NOT using
the RGB option. (When you don't select the RGB option, FrameMaker uses the 
PostScript Level 1
generator from the older UNIX versions of FrameMaker to generate PostScript for 
distilling.
I won't comment on that further! :-(  )

The second option is to open the images in question in Photoshop and resave as 
EPS (ASCII with
TIFF header). This option also could be used to fix any R=G=B RGB grayscale 
images; simply
convert to grayscale in Photoshop before saving as EPS.

- Dov



 -Original Message-
 From: framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com 
 [mailto:framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of
 Scott White
 Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2010 6:55 AM
 To: framers@lists.frameusers.com List
 Subject: Grayscale Images are RGB
 
 I've been playing with the settings with Acrobat Distiller 9 and Framemaker 9 
 trying to fix my
 grayscale images coming out rgb. I have been sending samples to my printer 
 and each and every sample
 he is telling me my text is black but the images are rgb. These are the same 
 images we have used for
 years in other catalogs with them and they were fine.
 
 I have followed his step-by-step acrobat distiller settings for 9 and the 
 results are not what I
 expect. He said he can convert the files for me at no charge, but I would 
 like to find out why this is
 happening.
 
 I print my Frame file to the acrobat printer option. I have a specific, 
 press-quality print setting
 within distiller 9 using my printers recommendation. Create the pdf.
 
 What I did in the past with older versions of Frame is I would print to 
 postscript and then distill
 and generate my pdf that way. No problems.
 
 We are running this on a mac through parallels. Windows XP Pro and Framemaker 
 9 with all the updates.
 
 Any thoughts would be appreciated.
 
 
 
 Scott White
 Media Production  EBC Manager
 Implementation Coordinator
 210-704-8239
 swh...@alamark.com
___


You are currently subscribed to Framers as arch...@mail-archive.com.

Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

RE: Grayscale Images are RGB

[Dov Isaacs]

On the Macintosh, real grayscale TIFF came out into PostScript and hence PDF as 
grayscale.
Other than for EPS, this never happened on Windows prior to FrameMaker 9 save 
as PDF without
the RGB option.

Unlike InDesign which uses Adobe's internal AGM technology for directly 
generating PostScript
and PDF, FrameMaker is still pretty much a Windows GDI client. Could FrameMaker 
be modified to
work like InDesign? Sure, if Adobe thought that there would be enough revenue 
to justify same.
Quite frankly, if you really need to worry about critical color and graphic 
arts issues and
don't need certain FrameMaker creature comforts and structured document 
features, you might
consider migrating to InDesign.

The XP hotfix has absolutely nothing to do with this issue. It only fixes text 
handling issues.

- Dov

 -Original Message-
 From: Scott White [mailto:swh...@alamark.com]
 Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2010 9:45 AM
 To: Dov Isaacs
 Cc: framers@lists.frameusers.com List; Jason Hauman
 Subject: Re: Grayscale Images are RGB
 
 Dov
 Thanks for your reply.
 Here's the history. We've been using these same images for years with older 
 versions of frame without
 problems. These images are grayscale .tif files that we painstakingly 
 processed over the years. More
 than 1,000,000 images.
 We have done all our catalogs with Frame, first on the mac and then of course 
 on windows when the mac
 was no longer supported. I still keep my mac running classic so I can run 
 Frame 7 just in case.
 
 So I don't think the images are in question.
 
 We first started seeing some issues arise in Framemaker 8 and it has since 
 moved along to Framemaker
 9. The print-quality PDF results with the same acrobat settings we had used 
 in the past were no longer
 giving us valid results.
 Our printer has recently been converting our outputs to grayscale and 4-color 
 for no charge since that
 was a simple fix. But for my clients who choose to use a different printer, 
 there is a charge for
 this.
 
 What I have decided to do is find out why settings we used to use for Acrobat 
 no longer work in later
 versions of Frame or Acrobat. I know technology changes so I need to find out 
 what I need to do. So
 far I have made sure I have the latest updates for Frame 9, installed the 
 hotfix that Art suggested on
 the xp drive of our iMac, and will incorporate your suggestions as well.
 
 I'm studying your first point about anything other than EPS will come out as 
 RGB. I find that
 interesting that a desktop publishing software app from Adobe would not 
 output the correct image
 results like InDesign. I know our .tif images were  output correctly in older 
 versions. I never had
 the printer give me an alert about my images before.
 
 I know we will get to the bottom of this so I can truly understand what is 
 happening with files so I
 can relay that to the clients who use Framemaker with our software to print 
 their 1,000-page catalogs.
 
 
 
 Scott White
 Media Production  EBC Manager
 Implementation Coordinator
 210-704-8239
 swh...@alamark.com
 
 
 
 
 On Jan 28, 2010, at 11:04 AM, Dov Isaacs wrote:
 
  Two possibilities here ...
 
  (1) Assuming you are using the RGB option for save as PDF or printing 
  to the Adobe PDF
  PostScript printer driver instance, except for images are in EPS format, 
  all grayscale and
  CMYK images imported into FrameMaker will come out as RGB. FrameMaker is a 
  GDI application
  except when NOT using the save as PDF without the RGB option.
 
  (2) Many images that users THINK are grayscale are actually RGB. When using 
  the various
  options in Photoshop to convert a color image to black and white, unless 
  you ALSO apply
  the option to convert what looks like a grayscale image to actual 
  grayscale, you will end
  up with an RGB image in which for every pixel R=G=B in value.
 
  R=G=B grayscale RGB images typically do not properly print with only the 
  K (black) channel
  on most devices and/or with most drivers.
 
  So, UNFORTUNATELY, with FrameMaker you have two options, both assuming that 
  the image really
  is grayscale and not an R=G=B RGB image:
 
  The first option is to use save as PDF and don't select the RGB option. 
  This only works for
  FrameMaker 9 and may be problematic if you run into one of the bugs 
  associated with NOT using
  the RGB option. (When you don't select the RGB option, FrameMaker uses the 
  PostScript Level 1
  generator from the older UNIX versions of FrameMaker to generate PostScript 
  for distilling.
  I won't comment on that further! :-(  )
 
  The second option is to open the images in question in Photoshop and resave 
  as EPS (ASCII with
  TIFF header). This option also could be used to fix any R=G=B RGB 
  grayscale images; simply
  convert to grayscale in Photoshop before saving as EPS.
 
  - Dov
___


You are currently subscribed to Framers as arch...@mail-archive.com.

Send list

Grayscale Images are RGB

[Dov Isaacs]

Two possibilities here ...

(1) Assuming you are using the "RGB option" for "save as PDF" or printing 
to the Adobe PDF
PostScript printer driver instance, except for images are in EPS format, all 
grayscale and
CMYK images imported into FrameMaker will come out as RGB. FrameMaker is a GDI 
application
except when NOT using the "save as PDF" without the RGB option.

(2) Many images that users THINK are grayscale are actually RGB. When using 
the various
options in Photoshop to convert a color image to black and white, unless you 
ALSO apply
the option to convert what looks like a grayscale image to actual grayscale, 
you will end
up with an RGB image in which for every pixel R=G=B in value.

R=G=B "grayscale" RGB images typically do not properly print with only the K 
(black) channel
on most devices and/or with most drivers.

So, UNFORTUNATELY, with FrameMaker you have two options, both assuming that the 
image really
is grayscale and not an R=G=B RGB image:

The first option is to use "save as PDF" and don't select the RGB option. This 
only works for
FrameMaker 9 and may be problematic if you run into one of the bugs associated 
with NOT using
the RGB option. (When you don't select the RGB option, FrameMaker uses the 
PostScript Level 1
generator from the older UNIX versions of FrameMaker to generate PostScript for 
distilling.
I won't comment on that further! :-(  )

The second option is to open the images in question in Photoshop and resave as 
EPS (ASCII with
TIFF header). This option also could be used to "fix" any R=G=B RGB grayscale 
images; simply
convert to grayscale in Photoshop before saving as EPS.

- Dov



> -Original Message-
> From: framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com [mailto:framers-bounces at 
> lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of
> Scott White
> Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2010 6:55 AM
> To: framers at lists.frameusers.com List
> Subject: Grayscale Images are RGB
> 
> I've been playing with the settings with Acrobat Distiller 9 and Framemaker 9 
> trying to fix my
> grayscale images coming out rgb. I have been sending samples to my printer 
> and each and every sample
> he is telling me my text is black but the images are rgb. These are the same 
> images we have used for
> years in other catalogs with them and they were fine.
> 
> I have followed his step-by-step acrobat distiller settings for 9 and the 
> results are not what I
> expect. He said he can convert the files for me at no charge, but I would 
> like to find out why this is
> happening.
> 
> I print my Frame file to the acrobat printer option. I have a specific, 
> press-quality print setting
> within distiller 9 using my printers recommendation. Create the pdf.
> 
> What I did in the past with older versions of Frame is I would print to 
> postscript and then distill
> and generate my pdf that way. No problems.
> 
> We are running this on a mac through parallels. Windows XP Pro and Framemaker 
> 9 with all the updates.
> 
> Any thoughts would be appreciated.
> 
> 
> 
> Scott White
> Media Production & EBC Manager
> Implementation Coordinator
> 210-704-8239
> swhite at alamark.com

Grayscale Images are RGB

[Dov Isaacs]

On the Macintosh, real grayscale TIFF came out into PostScript and hence PDF as 
grayscale.
Other than for EPS, this never happened on Windows prior to FrameMaker 9 "save 
as PDF" without
the RGB option.

Unlike InDesign which uses Adobe's internal AGM technology for directly 
generating PostScript
and PDF, FrameMaker is still pretty much a Windows GDI client. Could FrameMaker 
be modified to
work like InDesign? Sure, if Adobe thought that there would be enough revenue 
to justify same.
Quite frankly, if you really need to worry about critical color and graphic 
arts issues and
don't need certain FrameMaker creature comforts and structured document 
features, you might
consider migrating to InDesign.

The XP hotfix has absolutely nothing to do with this issue. It only fixes text 
handling issues.

- Dov

> -Original Message-
> From: Scott White [mailto:swhite at alamark.com]
> Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2010 9:45 AM
> To: Dov Isaacs
> Cc: framers at lists.frameusers.com List; Jason Hauman
> Subject: Re: Grayscale Images are RGB
> 
> Dov
> Thanks for your reply.
> Here's the history. We've been using these same images for years with older 
> versions of frame without
> problems. These images are grayscale .tif files that we painstakingly 
> processed over the years. More
> than 1,000,000 images.
> We have done all our catalogs with Frame, first on the mac and then of course 
> on windows when the mac
> was no longer supported. I still keep my mac running classic so I can run 
> Frame 7 just in case.
> 
> So I don't think the images are in question.
> 
> We first started seeing some issues arise in Framemaker 8 and it has since 
> moved along to Framemaker
> 9. The print-quality PDF results with the same acrobat settings we had used 
> in the past were no longer
> giving us valid results.
> Our printer has recently been converting our outputs to grayscale and 4-color 
> for no charge since that
> was a simple fix. But for my clients who choose to use a different printer, 
> there is a charge for
> this.
> 
> What I have decided to do is find out why settings we used to use for Acrobat 
> no longer work in later
> versions of Frame or Acrobat. I know technology changes so I need to find out 
> what I need to do. So
> far I have made sure I have the latest updates for Frame 9, installed the 
> hotfix that Art suggested on
> the xp drive of our iMac, and will incorporate your suggestions as well.
> 
> I'm studying your first point about anything other than EPS will come out as 
> RGB. I find that
> interesting that a desktop publishing software app from Adobe would not 
> output the correct image
> results like InDesign. I know our .tif images were  output correctly in older 
> versions. I never had
> the printer give me an alert about my images before.
> 
> I know we will get to the bottom of this so I can truly understand what is 
> happening with files so I
> can relay that to the clients who use Framemaker with our software to print 
> their 1,000-page catalogs.
> 
> 
> 
> Scott White
> Media Production & EBC Manager
> Implementation Coordinator
> 210-704-8239
> swhite at alamark.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Jan 28, 2010, at 11:04 AM, Dov Isaacs wrote:
> 
> > Two possibilities here ...
> >
> > (1) Assuming you are using the "RGB option" for "save as PDF" or printing 
> > to the Adobe PDF
> > PostScript printer driver instance, except for images are in EPS format, 
> > all grayscale and
> > CMYK images imported into FrameMaker will come out as RGB. FrameMaker is a 
> > GDI application
> > except when NOT using the "save as PDF" without the RGB option.
> >
> > (2) Many images that users THINK are grayscale are actually RGB. When using 
> > the various
> > options in Photoshop to convert a color image to black and white, unless 
> > you ALSO apply
> > the option to convert what looks like a grayscale image to actual 
> > grayscale, you will end
> > up with an RGB image in which for every pixel R=G=B in value.
> >
> > R=G=B "grayscale" RGB images typically do not properly print with only the 
> > K (black) channel
> > on most devices and/or with most drivers.
> >
> > So, UNFORTUNATELY, with FrameMaker you have two options, both assuming that 
> > the image really
> > is grayscale and not an R=G=B RGB image:
> >
> > The first option is to use "save as PDF" and don't select the RGB option. 
> > This only works for
> > FrameMaker 9 and may be problematic if you run into one of the bugs 
> > associated with NOT using
> > the RGB option. (When you don't select the 

RE: What version of FM is compatible with Windows 7

[Dov Isaacs]

There is a very big difference between works under Windows 7 versus
is supported on Windows 7. The only version of FrameMaker supported
for Windows 7 (both 32-bit and 64-bit) is FrameMaker 9.

- Dov

 -Original Message-
 From: framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com 
 [mailto:framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of
 Amy Severson
 Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2010 2:35 PM
 To: 'framers@lists.frameusers.com'
 Subject: What version of FM is compatible with Windows 7
 
 Hello.
 
 What versions of FM are supported on Windows 7 (64 bit or 32 bit)? We are 
 specifically wondering about
 FM 7.2.
 
 Thank you!
 
 
 
 Amy Severson
 Technical Communications Analyst
 Computers Unlimited
 techc...@cu.netmailto:techc...@cu.net
 www.cu.nethttp://www.cu.net/
___


You are currently subscribed to Framers as arch...@mail-archive.com.

Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

RE: What version of FM is compatible with Windows 7

[Dov Isaacs]

Supported means that Adobe Technical Support can assist you with any questions 
or problems and that Adobe officially claims that it works.

Works under means that users have tried it and there appears to be no 
incompatibilities. However, Adobe Tech Support will not assist you if you 
encounter any problems or want a question answered.

- Dov

From: Susan Modlin [mailto:smod...@yahoo.com]
Sent: Friday, January 08, 2010 12:14 PM
To: Dov Isaacs; framers@lists.frameusers.com
Subject: Re: What version of FM is compatible with Windows 7

OK, this may be a dumb question, but I'll ask it anyway. What's the difference 
between works under and is supported on? And the follow on question is 
does it matter as long as it works?

...Susan


From: Dov Isaacs isa...@adobe.com
To: framers@lists.frameusers.com framers@lists.frameusers.com
Sent: Fri, January 8, 2010 11:22:12 AM
Subject: RE: What version of FM is compatible with Windows 7

There is a very big difference between works under Windows 7 versus
is supported on Windows 7. The only version of FrameMaker supported
for Windows 7 (both 32-bit and 64-bit) is FrameMaker 9.

- Dov

___


You are currently subscribed to Framers as arch...@mail-archive.com.

Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

What version of FM is compatible with Windows 7

[Dov Isaacs]

There is a very big difference between "works under Windows 7" versus
"is supported on Windows 7." The only version of FrameMaker supported
for Windows 7 (both 32-bit and 64-bit) is FrameMaker 9.

- Dov

> -Original Message-
> From: framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com [mailto:framers-bounces at 
> lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of
> Amy Severson
> Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2010 2:35 PM
> To: 'framers at lists.frameusers.com'
> Subject: What version of FM is compatible with Windows 7
> 
> Hello.
> 
> What versions of FM are supported on Windows 7 (64 bit or 32 bit)? We are 
> specifically wondering about
> FM 7.2.
> 
> Thank you!
> 
> 
> 
> Amy Severson
> Technical Communications Analyst
> Computers Unlimited
> techcomm at cu.net
> www.cu.net

What version of FM is compatible with Windows 7

[Dov Isaacs]

Supported means that Adobe Technical Support can assist you with any questions 
or problems and that Adobe officially claims that it works.

Works under means that users have tried it and there appears to be no 
incompatibilities. However, Adobe Tech Support will not assist you if you 
encounter any problems or want a question answered.

- Dov

From: Susan Modlin [mailto:smod...@yahoo.com]
Sent: Friday, January 08, 2010 12:14 PM
To: Dov Isaacs; framers at lists.frameusers.com
Subject: Re: What version of FM is compatible with Windows 7

OK, this may be a dumb question, but I'll ask it anyway. What's the difference 
between "works under" and "is supported on"? And the follow on question is 
"does it matter as long as it works"?

...Susan

________
From: Dov Isaacs <isa...@adobe.com>
To: "framers at lists.frameusers.com" 
Sent: Fri, January 8, 2010 11:22:12 AM
Subject: RE: What version of FM is compatible with Windows 7

There is a very big difference between "works under Windows 7" versus
"is supported on Windows 7." The only version of FrameMaker supported
for Windows 7 (both 32-bit and 64-bit) is FrameMaker 9.

- Dov

RE: Disappearing Character When Printed

[Dov Isaacs]

For the record, all production of PDF from FrameMaker is currently done via
distillation of PostScript into PDF, regardless of whether that is accomplished
automatically via the FrameMaker save as PDF function, printing to the
Adobe PDF PostScript Printer Driver instance, or manually printing PostScript
to FILE: and then invoking the Distiller to convert the PostScript to PDF.

In theory, all these methods generate the same PostScript which should
yield the same PDF. The difference is that the save as PDF method attempts
to fully automate the procedure and simultaneously provide additional non-print
functionality via post-processing of the resultant PDF file. It is in the 
hand-shaking conventions that the save as PDF method sometimes fails; the
underlying PostScript is no different than the other methods.

There is no PDF Maker for FrameMaker nor are there any other paths that
produce PDF from FrameMaker other than via regular PostScript (or irregular
PostScript whatever that might mean).

In Windows, there is only one PostScript driver. A PostScript driver for
some ancient Agfa printer is the same driver used for a brand new Xerox Phaser
7500 printer which is the exact same driver used by the Adobe PDF PostScript
Printer Driver instance. The only DIFFERENCE between these driver instances
is in the PPD file that table drives the driver in terms of device-dependent
PostScript used for paper size and tray selection as well as other printer-
specific features and operations. For generation of PostScript for proper
creation of PDF files via distillation, one should never use anything other
than the PPD file associated with the Adobe PDF PostScript Printer Driver
instance.

There is an option in the Adobe PDF Settings pane of both the Printing
Preferences and the Printing Defaults panes of the Adobe PDF PostScript
Printer Driver instance Printer Properties labeled Rely on system fonts only;
do not use document fonts. In general, the most efficient and reliable PDF
will be generated if that option is enabled. In very rare instances, that option
might need to be disabled such as when using FrameMaker documents that have EPS
files with embedded fonts. But the need to switch that option off or on would
not result in the symptom originally described.

Note that if you need to apply the Windows fix for Windows XP or Vista (not
necessary for Windows 7) as suggested by others responding to this issue, go to 
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/952909/en-us for the fix.

- Dov




 -Original Message-
 From: eli marcus
 Sent: Tuesday, December 29, 2009 11:57 PM
 Subject: RE: Disappearing Character When Printed
 
 Hi Eric,
 this sounds to me like a Postscript/printer driver issue.
 Years ago, while working at a digital printing shop, I discovered that 
 certain characters (in a
 foreign language) would disappear in printing, and often the whole sentence 
 between such characters
 would also disappear.
 The issue was the Postscript definitions of the printer driver (at the time 
 it was an industrial HP 5
 series printer).
 
 I suggest trying to use a different postscript driver for printing both to 
 PDF and to the physical
 printer.
 One of the good old standbys that always worked for me was an Agfa postscript 
 driver that is in the
 native Windows library of printer drivers installed with Windows.
 
 Another avenue to explore may be the include fonts settings in the 
 Acrobat/PDF distiller settings -
 and it is always recommended to print to postscript when creating a PDF, 
 rather than use the PDF Maker
 or other plugins, which create PDF by a different path than the regular 
 postscript.
 
 
 
 --
   Eli Marcus
   www.EliMarcus.com
   blog: http://elisblues.blogspot.com
   http://www.myspace.com/elisblues
___


You are currently subscribed to Framers as arch...@mail-archive.com.

Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

Disappearing Character When Printed

[Dov Isaacs]

For the record, all production of PDF from FrameMaker is currently done via
distillation of PostScript into PDF, regardless of whether that is accomplished
automatically via the FrameMaker "save as PDF" function, printing to the
"Adobe PDF PostScript Printer Driver" instance, or manually printing PostScript
to "FILE:" and then invoking the Distiller to convert the PostScript to PDF.

In theory, all these methods generate the same PostScript which should
yield the same PDF. The difference is that the "save as PDF" method attempts
to fully automate the procedure and simultaneously provide additional non-print
functionality via post-processing of the resultant PDF file. It is in the 
hand-shaking conventions that the "save as PDF" method sometimes fails; the
underlying PostScript is no different than the other methods.

There is no "PDF Maker" for FrameMaker nor are there any other paths that
produce PDF from FrameMaker other than via "regular PostScript" (or "irregular
PostScript" whatever that might mean).

In Windows, there is only one "PostScript driver." A PostScript driver for
some ancient Agfa printer is the same driver used for a brand new Xerox Phaser
7500 printer which is the exact same driver used by the Adobe PDF PostScript
Printer Driver instance. The only DIFFERENCE between these driver "instances"
is in the PPD file that "table drives" the driver in terms of device-dependent
PostScript used for paper size and tray selection as well as other printer-
specific features and operations. For generation of PostScript for proper
creation of PDF files via distillation, one should never use anything other
than the PPD file associated with the Adobe PDF PostScript Printer Driver
instance.

There is an option in the "Adobe PDF Settings" pane of both the "Printing
Preferences" and the "Printing Defaults" panes of the Adobe PDF PostScript
Printer Driver instance "Printer Properties" labeled "Rely on system fonts only;
do not use document fonts." In general, the most efficient and reliable PDF
will be generated if that option is enabled. In very rare instances, that option
might need to be disabled such as when using FrameMaker documents that have EPS
files with embedded fonts. But the need to switch that option off or on would
not result in the symptom originally described.

Note that if you need to apply the Windows fix for Windows XP or Vista (not
necessary for Windows 7) as suggested by others responding to this issue, go to 
 for the fix.

- Dov




> -Original Message-
> From: eli marcus
> Sent: Tuesday, December 29, 2009 11:57 PM
> Subject: RE: Disappearing Character When Printed
> 
> Hi Eric,
> this sounds to me like a Postscript/printer driver issue.
> Years ago, while working at a digital printing shop, I discovered that 
> certain characters (in a
> foreign language) would disappear in printing, and often the whole sentence 
> between such characters
> would also disappear.
> The issue was the Postscript definitions of the printer driver (at the time 
> it was an industrial HP 5
> series printer).
> 
> I suggest trying to use a different postscript driver for printing both to 
> PDF and to the physical
> printer.
> One of the good old standbys that always worked for me was an Agfa postscript 
> driver that is in the
> native Windows library of printer drivers installed with Windows.
> 
> Another avenue to explore may be the "include fonts" settings in the 
> Acrobat/PDF distiller settings -
> and it is always recommended to print to postscript when creating a PDF, 
> rather than use the PDF Maker
> or other plugins, which create PDF by a different path than the regular 
> postscript.
> 
> 
> 
> --
>   Eli Marcus
>   www.EliMarcus.com
>   blog: http://elisblues.blogspot.com
>   http://www.myspace.com/elisblues

RE: Applications on Windows 7

[Dov Isaacs]

Forget about anything less than Acrobat 9.2 for Windows 7.
Acrobat 8.1 may work but is officially unsupported!

- Dov

 -Original Message-
 From: framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com 
 [mailto:framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of
 Carrie Baker
 Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2009 5:05 AM
 To: framers@lists.frameusers.com
 Subject: Applications on Windows 7
 
 Hi,
 I  might be getting a new laptop soon.
 If so, it will run on Windows 7.
 
 I am currently using
 Acrobat 7
 Frame 7.2
 ePro Publisher Version 9.2
 
 At the moment these applications are sufficient for my requirements.
 
 My questions are:
 1. Do the above applications run OK on Windows 7
 2. Are these really very old versions, or are there other people who are
 also using these versions of the software? (I use the ePro Pub to create 3
 or 4 help files about twice a year).
 3. I am a lone tech writer in a company who like everyone else has budget
 constraints, which I why I did not upgrade, but is there anything which I
 really should upgrade?
 4. Will I expect any problems reinstalling them on a new computer?
 5. I also have all sorts of Frame add-ons ranging from the Archive utility
 to Table Cleaner will they all work?
 6. Any other tips and hints about moving computers (I am concerned, as I
 have made all sorts of customizations etc to my configuration and probably
 can hardly remember how I did it all)
 
 Thanks for the assistance
 
 --
 Carrie Baker
 carrie...@gmail.com
___


You are currently subscribed to Framers as arch...@mail-archive.com.

Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

RE: Creating PDFs across a Network

[Dov Isaacs]

Such use of Acrobat (use of Distiller on one system to create PDF from 
PostScript generated on another system sent directly over the network)
is in direct violation of the Acrobat End User License Agreement.

You need a server version of Distiller for this purpose.

- Dov


 -Original Message-
 From: Kelly McDaniel
 Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2009 7:48 AM
 
 You must have at least Acrobat installed in the UK with the Acrobat PDF
 printer driver. After that, it's just network issues.
 
 -Original Message-
 From: jdela...@comcast.net
 Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2009 9:34 AM
 
 Has anyone tried creating PDFs from FrameMaker 9 (XP Pro) across a
 network? We need to try Acrobat 9 Standard, which is on a machine in the
 UK. How does one create PDF printer settings for another server? They
 don't have FM there.
 
 Mystified in Michigan
___


You are currently subscribed to Framers as arch...@mail-archive.com.

Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

Applications on Windows 7

[Dov Isaacs]

Forget about anything less than Acrobat 9.2 for Windows 7.
Acrobat 8.1 may work but is officially unsupported!

- Dov

> -Original Message-
> From: framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com [mailto:framers-bounces at 
> lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of
> Carrie Baker
> Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2009 5:05 AM
> To: framers at lists.frameusers.com
> Subject: Applications on Windows 7
> 
> Hi,
> I  might be getting a new laptop soon.
> If so, it will run on Windows 7.
> 
> I am currently using
> Acrobat 7
> Frame 7.2
> ePro Publisher Version 9.2
> 
> At the moment these applications are sufficient for my requirements.
> 
> My questions are:
> 1. Do the above applications run OK on Windows 7
> 2. Are these really very old versions, or are there other people who are
> also using these versions of the software? (I use the ePro Pub to create 3
> or 4 help files about twice a year).
> 3. I am a lone tech writer in a company who like everyone else has budget
> constraints, which I why I did not upgrade, but is there anything which I
> really should upgrade?
> 4. Will I expect any problems reinstalling them on a new computer?
> 5. I also have all sorts of Frame add-ons ranging from the Archive utility
> to Table Cleaner will they all work?
> 6. Any other tips and hints about moving computers (I am concerned, as I
> have made all sorts of customizations etc to my configuration and probably
> can hardly remember how I did it all)
> 
> Thanks for the assistance
> 
> --
> Carrie Baker
> carriebak at gmail.com

Creating PDFs across a Network

[Dov Isaacs]

Such use of Acrobat (use of Distiller on one system to create PDF from 
PostScript generated on another system sent directly over the network)
is in direct violation of the Acrobat End User License Agreement.

You need a server version of Distiller for this purpose.

- Dov


> -Original Message-
> From: Kelly McDaniel
> Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2009 7:48 AM
> 
> You must have at least Acrobat installed in the UK with the Acrobat PDF
> printer driver. After that, it's just network issues.
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: jdeland1 at comcast.net
> Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2009 9:34 AM
> 
> Has anyone tried creating PDFs from FrameMaker 9 (XP Pro) across a
> network? We need to try Acrobat 9 Standard, which is on a machine in the
> UK. How does one create PDF printer settings for another server? They
> don't have FM there.
> 
> Mystified in Michigan

RE: fonts in Frame9 on Win7

[Dov Isaacs]

Windows 7 has a new Fonts Control Panel that is a bit weird and sometimes
buggy.

First of all, it groups all fonts of the same family together. For example,
all Arial is listed as one font, but if you click on that font, it opens a
window showing all the styles. For some Adobe font families, you might see
thirty-something typefaces that way and others, you might see several
separate groupings.

Secondly, I've found a problem in which the Windows 7 font panel refuses
to show any Type 1 fonts even after installing them. I am working with
Microsoft to debug and fix that problem. (Removing such hidden fonts
required registry edits - double ouch!)

- Dov

 -Original Message-
 From: Carol J. Elkins [mailto:celk...@awrittenword.com]
 Sent: Monday, November 16, 2009 4:12 PM
 To: Dov Isaacs
 Subject: [Free Framers] fonts in Frame9 on Win7
 
 
 I'm running Frame9 on a brand new install of Win7 on a brand new Dell
 workstation. Other than being horribly visually disoriented, all
 seems to have gone fairly smoothly (sorry Tammy). But I know the fun
 has yet to really start. My burning question of the day concerns
 fonts. The Fonts folder in the Control Panel contains a mere 11
 fonts, yet Frame and Word show zillions of fonts in their font lists.
 Where the heck are they located?  I've followed the Help instructions
 for loading new fonts (double click the font name and select Install)
 and they don't end up in the Fonts folder. Nor does drag-and-drop
 allow me to put them in the Fonts folder.
 
 
 The reason I'm asking is because 1) I want to know where the fonts
 are stored; and 2) I'd like to uninstall most of the non-system fonts
 that Frame sees as available. They take a long time to load and I
 don't need 'em. Do any of you new Win7 gurus happen to know where
 those suckers live?
 
 
 Carol
___


You are currently subscribed to Framers as arch...@mail-archive.com.

Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

fonts in Frame9 on Win7

[Dov Isaacs]

Windows 7 has a new Fonts Control Panel that is a bit weird and sometimes
buggy.

First of all, it groups all fonts of the same family together. For example,
all Arial is listed as one font, but if you click on that font, it opens a
window showing all the styles. For some Adobe font families, you might see
thirty-something typefaces that way and others, you might see several
separate groupings.

Secondly, I've found a problem in which the Windows 7 font panel refuses
to show any Type 1 fonts even after installing them. I am working with
Microsoft to debug and fix that problem. (Removing such "hidden" fonts
required registry edits - double ouch!)

- Dov

> -Original Message-
> From: Carol J. Elkins [mailto:celkins at awrittenword.com]
> Sent: Monday, November 16, 2009 4:12 PM
> To: Dov Isaacs
> Subject: [Free Framers] fonts in Frame9 on Win7
> 
> 
> I'm running Frame9 on a brand new install of Win7 on a brand new Dell
> workstation. Other than being horribly visually disoriented, all
> seems to have gone fairly smoothly (sorry Tammy). But I know the fun
> has yet to really start. My burning question of the day concerns
> fonts. The Fonts folder in the Control Panel contains a mere 11
> fonts, yet Frame and Word show zillions of fonts in their font lists.
> Where the heck are they located?  I've followed the Help instructions
> for loading new fonts (double click the font name and select Install)
> and they don't end up in the Fonts folder. Nor does drag-and-drop
> allow me to put them in the Fonts folder.
> 
> 
> The reason I'm asking is because 1) I want to know where the fonts
> are stored; and 2) I'd like to uninstall most of the non-system fonts
> that Frame sees as available. They take a long time to load and I
> don't need 'em. Do any of you new Win7 gurus happen to know where
> those suckers live?
> 
> 
> Carol

RE: Adobe's upgrade rort

[Dov Isaacs]

Alan,

No one in Adobe Technical Support or Adobe Customer Support is authorized
to discuss product pricing with customers, even if they did know the factors
behind same.

Product pricing at Adobe is done via product managers and is not discussed
with any of the engineering or support organizations within Adobe.

Any response you get on this forum will be strictly speculation.

- Dov


 -Original Message-
 From: framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com 
 [mailto:framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of
 Alan Litchfield
 Sent: Sunday, October 18, 2009 12:40 PM
 To: FrameUsers List
 Subject: Adobe's upgrade rort
 
 Can anyone explain to me why it is that Adobe charges USD399 for the
 upgrade of FrameMaker to version 9 for domestic customers but USD515
 for the same thing for International customers.
 
 There are no shipping costs when it has been downloaded and even if
 shipping were included I don't see how they can charge USD116 for
 shipping a small box anyway.
 
 No I haven't asked Adobe, who there could possibly tell me. Certainly
 no one on the helpdesk.
 
 Alan
___


You are currently subscribed to Framers as arch...@mail-archive.com.

Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

Adobe's upgrade rort

[Dov Isaacs]

Alan,

No one in Adobe Technical Support or Adobe Customer Support is authorized
to discuss product pricing with customers, even if they did know the factors
behind same.

Product pricing at Adobe is done via product managers and is not discussed
with any of the engineering or support organizations within Adobe.

Any response you get on this forum will be strictly speculation.

- Dov


> -Original Message-
> From: framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com [mailto:framers-bounces at 
> lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of
> Alan Litchfield
> Sent: Sunday, October 18, 2009 12:40 PM
> To: FrameUsers List
> Subject: Adobe's upgrade rort
> 
> Can anyone explain to me why it is that Adobe charges USD399 for the
> upgrade of FrameMaker to version 9 for domestic customers but USD515
> for the same thing for International customers.
> 
> There are no shipping costs when it has been downloaded and even if
> shipping were included I don't see how they can charge USD116 for
> shipping a small box anyway.
> 
> No I haven't asked Adobe, who there could possibly tell me. Certainly
> no one on the helpdesk.
> 
> Alan

RE: Running FM9 (and TCS2) on 64-bit systems

[Dov Isaacs]

FrameMaker automatically runs properly in 32-bit mode in Vista 64-bit and 
Windows 7
64-bit versions. There is nothing that you need to do to cause this to happen.

- Dov

 -Original Message-
 From: Matt Sullivan [mailto:m...@grafixtraining.com]
 Sent: Friday, September 11, 2009 9:19 AM
 To: Dov Isaacs; framers@lists.frameusers.com; 'Pam Coca'; RJ Jacquez
 Subject: Running FM9 (and TCS2) on 64-bit systems
 
 In listening to various sources discuss this, can someone clarify this issue
 for me?
 
 Does Frame automatically run in 32-bit mode on a Vista 64-bit system, or do
 you have to do setup to get it to run properly.
 
 
 -Matt
 
 Matt Sullivan
 GRAFIX Training
 
 m...@grafixtraining.com
 www.grafixtraining.com
 office 714 960-6840
 cell  txt 714 585-2335
 sms message
 skype: mattrsullivan
 twitter: mattrsullivan
 
 
 linkedin
 
 
 facebook
 
 
 
 
 -Original Message-
 From: framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com
 [mailto:framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of Dov Isaacs
 Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2009 1:03 AM
 To: framers@lists.frameusers.com
 Subject: RE: Soliciting hardware recommendations
 
 FrameMaker certainly does run on Vista 64-bit and runs exceptionally well!
 I ran FrameMaker 8 and now FrameMaker 9 in that environment without any
 problem whatsoever.
 
 What is true is that FrameMaker is a 32-bit application. Vista 64-bit runs
 32-bit applications without a problem in 32-bit mode. What you do gain
 running a program like FrameMaker under Vista 64-bit is the ability of
 support much larger amounts of real memory (I run with 8 gigabytes) and thus
 run the risk of less paging activity to kill performance when running
 multiple applications concurrently! Also, I have found Vista 64-bit to be
 rock solid, running for weeks on end without reboots; my only reboots being
 necessary for the monthly Patch Tuesday Microsoft OS updates.
 
   - Dov
 
  -Original Message-
  From: framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com
  [mailto:framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of Reng, Dr.
  Winfried
  Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2009 12:28 AM
  To: framers@lists.frameusers.com
  Subject: RE: Soliciting hardware recommendations
 
  Hi,
 
   If you get an Intel Core 2 Duo (or Core 2 Quad) system, running at
   2.6GHz or higher, with 4GB of DDR2 RAM and 7200rpm drives (RAID 0
   might be a bit of overkill but easy enough to do), Windows Vista
   Business 64-bit, and something like an nVidia 9600GT card or better,
   you will have *more* than enough power to run FrameMaker with
   excellent performance. This should cost under $1000 or so ...
   depending on the other options you want on it.
 
  Of course you can continue to use a Mac system.
  Only a correction regarding Vista 64 bit. As far as I know FrameMaker
  does not run on 64 bit Vista.
  That was posted here several times.
 
  Best regards
 
  Winfried
 ___
 
 
 You are currently subscribed to Framers as m...@grafixtraining.com.
 
 Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com.
 
 To unsubscribe send a blank email to
 framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com
 or visit
 http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/matt%40grafixtraining.co
 m
 
 Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit
 http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

___


You are currently subscribed to Framers as arch...@mail-archive.com.

Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

Running FM9 (and TCS2) on 64-bit systems

[Dov Isaacs]

FrameMaker automatically runs properly in 32-bit mode in Vista 64-bit and 
Windows 7
64-bit versions. There is nothing that you need to do to cause this to happen.

- Dov

> -Original Message-
> From: Matt Sullivan [mailto:matt at grafixtraining.com]
> Sent: Friday, September 11, 2009 9:19 AM
> To: Dov Isaacs; framers at lists.frameusers.com; 'Pam Coca'; RJ Jacquez
> Subject: Running FM9 (and TCS2) on 64-bit systems
> 
> In listening to various sources discuss this, can someone clarify this issue
> for me?
> 
> Does Frame automatically run in 32-bit mode on a Vista 64-bit system, or do
> you have to do setup to get it to run properly.
> 
> 
> -Matt
> 
> Matt Sullivan
> GRAFIX Training
> 
> matt at grafixtraining.com
> www.grafixtraining.com
> office 714 960-6840
> cell & txt 714 585-2335
> sms message
> skype: mattrsullivan
> twitter: mattrsullivan
> 
> 
> linkedin
> 
> 
> facebook
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com
> [mailto:framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of Dov Isaacs
> Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2009 1:03 AM
> To: framers at lists.frameusers.com
> Subject: RE: Soliciting hardware recommendations
> 
> FrameMaker certainly does run on Vista 64-bit and runs exceptionally well!
> I ran FrameMaker 8 and now FrameMaker 9 in that environment without any
> problem whatsoever.
> 
> What is true is that FrameMaker is a 32-bit application. Vista 64-bit runs
> 32-bit applications without a problem in 32-bit mode. What you do gain
> running a program like FrameMaker under Vista 64-bit is the ability of
> support much larger amounts of real memory (I run with 8 gigabytes) and thus
> run the risk of less paging activity to kill performance when running
> multiple applications concurrently! Also, I have found Vista 64-bit to be
> rock solid, running for weeks on end without reboots; my only reboots being
> necessary for the monthly "Patch Tuesday" Microsoft OS updates.
> 
>   - Dov
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com
> > [mailto:framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of Reng, Dr.
> > Winfried
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2009 12:28 AM
> > To: framers at lists.frameusers.com
> > Subject: RE: Soliciting hardware recommendations
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > > If you get an Intel Core 2 Duo (or Core 2 Quad) system, running at
> > > 2.6GHz or higher, with 4GB of DDR2 RAM and 7200rpm drives (RAID 0
> > > might be a bit of overkill but easy enough to do), Windows Vista
> > > Business 64-bit, and something like an nVidia 9600GT card or better,
> > > you will have *more* than enough power to run FrameMaker with
> > > excellent performance. This should cost under $1000 or so ...
> > > depending on the other options you want on it.
> >
> > Of course you can continue to use a Mac system.
> > Only a correction regarding Vista 64 bit. As far as I know FrameMaker
> > does not run on 64 bit Vista.
> > That was posted here several times.
> >
> > Best regards
> >
> > Winfried
> ___
> 
> 
> You are currently subscribed to Framers as matt at grafixtraining.com.
> 
> Send list messages to framers at lists.frameusers.com.
> 
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> framers-unsubscribe at lists.frameusers.com
> or visit
> http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/matt%40grafixtraining.co
> m
> 
> Send administrative questions to listadmin at frameusers.com. Visit
> http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

RE: Acrobat Pro 9.0 greys the colored images

[Dov Isaacs]

Exactly how are you printing FM books to PS?

Assuming that you really want to manually produce PostScript and then distill 
same,
the proper manner to do this is to print to the Adobe PDF PostScript Printer 
Driver
instance but directed to file. That method uses the Distiller PPD. My best 
guess is
that you created PostScript by printing to file using some generic or 
monochrome
PostScript printer driver instance. That would have caused the symptoms you 
describe.

- Dov

 -Original Message-
 From: framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com 
 [mailto:framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of
 Garnier Garnier
 Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 8:06 PM
 To: framers@lists.frameusers.com
 Subject: Acrobat Pro 9.0 greys the colored images
 
 Hello,
 
 With Acrobat Pro when I print FM books to PS and the convert to PDFs the 
 colored images become grey.
 Any idea why? Do I need to change/configure any settings?  I do not face this 
 issue when I print a MS
 Word file to PS and then to PDF.
 
 B/R
 Garnier
___


You are currently subscribed to Framers as arch...@mail-archive.com.

Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

Acrobat Pro 9.0 greys the colored images

[Dov Isaacs]

Exactly how are you printing "FM books to PS"?

Assuming that you really want to manually produce PostScript and then distill 
same,
the proper manner to do this is to print to the Adobe PDF PostScript Printer 
Driver
instance but directed to file. That method uses the Distiller PPD. My best 
guess is
that you created PostScript by printing to file using some "generic" or 
monochrome
PostScript printer driver instance. That would have caused the symptoms you 
describe.

- Dov

> -Original Message-
> From: framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com [mailto:framers-bounces at 
> lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of
> Garnier Garnier
> Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 8:06 PM
> To: framers at lists.frameusers.com
> Subject: Acrobat Pro 9.0 greys the colored images
> 
> Hello,
> 
> With Acrobat Pro when I print FM books to PS and the convert to PDFs the 
> colored images become grey.
> Any idea why? Do I need to change/configure any settings? ?I do not face this 
> issue when I print a MS
> Word file to PS and then to PDF.
> 
> B/R
> Garnier

RE: Transparent Fonts

[Dov Isaacs]

FrameMaker doesn't support the Adobe PDF transparency model in any way,
shape, or form. The only way you can do wrt/ transparency is to import
content that has already flattened (in my book, we call that ruined
transparency) in either PDF or EPS. Specifically making text in
FrameMaker itself (i.e., not imported) anything other than 100% opaque 
is impossible.

If you need artsy live transparency stuff in the content of text in a layout
program itself, you need InDesign.

- Dov

 -Original Message-
 From: framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com 
 [mailto:framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of
 ecid...@zoominternet.net
 Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2009 9:43 PM
 To: framers@lists.frameusers.com
 Subject: Transparent Fonts
 
  Okay Fellow Frame Templars.
  Live!  From New York!you finish the rest
  First, the setup:  Windows XP, Frame 8 unstructured
  Next:  The dilemma.  I am trying to figure out whether FrameMaker
 has the capability of being able to make or handle the issue of font
 transparency.  Yup, being able to view a graphic behind the text in
 front of itartsy stuff.
  The theoretical is having a graphic and then embedding text over the
 graphic, but being able to see through the text.  Am I making any
 sense here?
  Is there a plug in or technique?  Currently, we use Photoshop
 (another fine Adobe product) to perform this function, but I would
 rather stay within the Framemaker environment.
  As usual, assistance is always appreciated.
  All the best
  From New York.yup, and it's live.
  Eduardo
  724.494.9213...cell number
___


You are currently subscribed to Framers as arch...@mail-archive.com.

Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

"Transparent Fonts"

[Dov Isaacs]

FrameMaker doesn't support the Adobe PDF transparency model in any way,
shape, or form. The only way you can do wrt/ transparency is to import
content that has already flattened (in my book, we call that "ruined
transparency") in either PDF or EPS. Specifically making text in
FrameMaker itself (i.e., not imported) anything other than 100% opaque 
is impossible.

If you need artsy live transparency stuff in the content of text in a layout
program itself, you need InDesign.

- Dov

> -Original Message-
> From: framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com [mailto:framers-bounces at 
> lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of
> ecidade at zoominternet.net
> Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2009 9:43 PM
> To: framers at lists.frameusers.com
> Subject: "Transparent Fonts"
> 
>  Okay Fellow Frame Templars.
>  Live!  From New York!you finish the rest
>  First, the setup:  Windows XP, Frame 8 unstructured
>  Next:  The dilemma.  I am trying to figure out whether FrameMaker
> has the capability of being able to make or handle the issue of font
> transparency.  Yup, being able to view a graphic behind the text in
> front of it"artsy" stuff.
>  The theoretical is having a graphic and then embedding text over the
> graphic, but being able to "see" through the text.  Am I making any
> sense here?
>  Is there a plug in or technique?  Currently, we use Photoshop
> (another fine Adobe product) to perform this function, but I would
> rather stay within the Framemaker environment.
>  As usual, assistance is always appreciated.
>  All the best
>  From New York.yup, and it's live.
>  Eduardo
>  724.494.9213...cell number

RE: Standard font for technical documentation

[Dov Isaacs]

To set the record straight, whether you like Helvetica and/or Arial or not ...

Arial and Helvetica are totally different san serif fonts from different 
foundries.
Arial is from Monotype and not from Microsoft. Microsoft licensed a special 
version
of Arial from Monotype for bundling with Windows and other software (notably, 
Office).

Helvetica was not designed by Herman Zapf.

What was special about the version of Arial licensed by Monotype to Microsoft 
was
that the set widths of the glyphs in Arial were made to match the set 
widths of
corresponding glyphs in the version of Helvetica that Adobe licensed from 
Linotype,
thus providing a host-based substitution font for the printer-based Helvetica in
Adobe PostScript printers. Similar hackery was performed by a number of 
CloneScript
providers to provide printer-based work-alike fonts to substitute for 
Helvetica,
one example being BitStream's Swiss 721 SWA family (where SWA is set width
adapted to correspond to the set widths of PostScript base-35 fonts) which was
admittedly and unabashedly a knock-off of Helvetica and specifically the 
Helvetica
used in Adobe PostScript.

Ironically, for Windows users, the fact that Microsoft used a work-alike font to
substitute for Helvetica (and did similarly for other Adobe PostScript base-35 
fonts),
eliminated a major source of problems that plagues Macintosh users to this day.
Apple chose to license Helvetica, Times, Palatino, and ITC Zapf Dingbats with
compatible set widths to those in the Adobe PostScript base-35 font set and then
convert same to TrueType format and then bundled same with MacOS. Unfortunately,
those fonts aren't quite the same as the Adobe PostScript base 35 fonts, but do
share identical names. Macintosh users who wish to use any of those base 35 
fonts
still need to choose whether to use the host-based Apple TrueType fonts (and not
install the Adobe Type 1 fonts, simultaneously making sure to always download 
those
fonts to the printer and/or embed same in PDF files) or to install the Adobe 
Type 1
versions of the fonts and totally blow away the MacOS TrueType versions. You 
have
no idea how many prepress and PDF problems we run into due to this particular
conflict due to identical font names.

- Dov

PS: Remember that font is a four letter word beginning with an 'f'.



 -Original Message-
 From: Graeme R Forbes
 Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2009 1:22 AM
 To: framers@lists.frameusers.com
 Subject: Re: Standard font for technical documentation
 
 
 Syed said:
 
 Helvetica for all headers. I used to use Arial, but was clearly shown
 (in this list! :)) that Helvetica looks a lot better in larger sizes
 (like headers) and in printed form - better curves, etc.
 
 
 I missed this discussion but I'm not surprised. I've read in more than one 
 place
 in the typographical literature that Arial was a cheap knock-off of Helvetica 
 that
 Microsoft cobbled together to avoid paying royalties (to Herman Zapf or
 Linotype?). (This story may be false but it *sounds* true!) Apparently there 
 is no
 way that font designers can protect their work -- anyone with the right 
 software
 can copy what may have taken months of effort, change the name, and sell it or
 give it away.
 
 Graeme Forbes
___


You are currently subscribed to Framers as arch...@mail-archive.com.

Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

Standard font for technical documentation

[Dov Isaacs]

To set the record straight, whether you like Helvetica and/or Arial or not ...

Arial and Helvetica are totally different san serif fonts from different 
foundries.
Arial is from Monotype and not from Microsoft. Microsoft licensed a special 
version
of Arial from Monotype for bundling with Windows and other software (notably, 
Office).

Helvetica was not designed by Herman Zapf.

What was "special" about the version of Arial licensed by Monotype to Microsoft 
was
that the "set widths" of the glyphs in Arial were made to match the "set 
widths" of
corresponding glyphs in the version of Helvetica that Adobe licensed from 
Linotype,
thus providing a host-based substitution font for the printer-based Helvetica in
Adobe PostScript printers. Similar hackery was performed by a number of 
CloneScript
providers to provide printer-based "work-alike" fonts to substitute for 
Helvetica,
one example being BitStream's "Swiss 721 SWA" family (where "SWA" is "set width
adapted" to correspond to the set widths of PostScript base-35 fonts) which was
admittedly and unabashedly a knock-off of Helvetica and specifically the 
Helvetica
used in Adobe PostScript.

Ironically, for Windows users, the fact that Microsoft used a work-alike font to
substitute for Helvetica (and did similarly for other Adobe PostScript base-35 
fonts),
eliminated a major source of problems that plagues Macintosh users to this day.
Apple chose to license Helvetica, Times, Palatino, and ITC Zapf Dingbats with
compatible set widths to those in the Adobe PostScript base-35 font set and then
convert same to TrueType format and then bundled same with MacOS. Unfortunately,
those fonts aren't quite the same as the Adobe PostScript base 35 fonts, but do
share identical names. Macintosh users who wish to use any of those base 35 
fonts
still need to choose whether to use the host-based Apple TrueType fonts (and not
install the Adobe Type 1 fonts, simultaneously making sure to always download 
those
fonts to the printer and/or embed same in PDF files) or to install the Adobe 
Type 1
versions of the fonts and totally blow away the MacOS TrueType versions. You 
have
no idea how many prepress and PDF problems we run into due to this particular
conflict due to identical font names.

- Dov

PS: Remember that "font" is a four letter word beginning with an 'f'.



> -Original Message-
> From: Graeme R Forbes
> Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2009 1:22 AM
> To: framers at lists.frameusers.com
> Subject: Re: Standard font for technical documentation
> 
> 
> Syed said:
> 
> "Helvetica for all headers. I used to use Arial, but was clearly shown
> (in this list! :)) that Helvetica looks a lot better in larger sizes
> (like headers) and in printed form - better curves, etc."
> 
> 
> I missed this discussion but I'm not surprised. I've read in more than one 
> place
> in the typographical literature that Arial was a cheap knock-off of Helvetica 
> that
> Microsoft cobbled together to avoid paying royalties (to Herman Zapf or
> Linotype?). (This story may be false but it *sounds* true!) Apparently there 
> is no
> way that font designers can protect their work -- anyone with the right 
> software
> can copy what may have taken months of effort, change the name, and sell it or
> give it away.
> 
> Graeme Forbes

RE: Soliciting hardware recommendations

[Dov Isaacs]

FrameMaker certainly does run on Vista 64-bit and runs exceptionally well!
I ran FrameMaker 8 and now FrameMaker 9 in that environment without any problem
whatsoever.

What is true is that FrameMaker is a 32-bit application. Vista 64-bit runs
32-bit applications without a problem in 32-bit mode. What you do gain running
a program like FrameMaker under Vista 64-bit is the ability of support much
larger amounts of real memory (I run with 8 gigabytes) and thus run the risk
of less paging activity to kill performance when running multiple applications
concurrently! Also, I have found Vista 64-bit to be rock solid, running for
weeks on end without reboots; my only reboots being necessary for the monthly
Patch Tuesday Microsoft OS updates.

- Dov

 -Original Message-
 From: framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com 
 [mailto:framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of
 Reng, Dr. Winfried
 Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2009 12:28 AM
 To: framers@lists.frameusers.com
 Subject: RE: Soliciting hardware recommendations
 
 Hi,
 
  If you get an Intel Core 2 Duo (or Core 2 Quad) system, running at
  2.6GHz or higher, with 4GB of DDR2 RAM and 7200rpm drives
  (RAID 0 might
  be a bit of overkill but easy enough to do), Windows Vista Business
  64-bit, and something like an nVidia 9600GT card or better, you will
  have *more* than enough power to run FrameMaker with excellent
  performance. This should cost under $1000 or so ... depending on the
  other options you want on it.
 
 Of course you can continue to use a Mac system.
 Only a correction regarding Vista 64 bit. As far
 as I know FrameMaker does not run on 64 bit Vista.
 That was posted here several times.
 
 Best regards
 
 Winfried
___


You are currently subscribed to Framers as arch...@mail-archive.com.

Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

Soliciting hardware recommendations

[Dov Isaacs]

FrameMaker certainly does run on Vista 64-bit and runs exceptionally well!
I ran FrameMaker 8 and now FrameMaker 9 in that environment without any problem
whatsoever.

What is true is that FrameMaker is a 32-bit application. Vista 64-bit runs
32-bit applications without a problem in 32-bit mode. What you do gain running
a program like FrameMaker under Vista 64-bit is the ability of support much
larger amounts of real memory (I run with 8 gigabytes) and thus run the risk
of less paging activity to kill performance when running multiple applications
concurrently! Also, I have found Vista 64-bit to be rock solid, running for
weeks on end without reboots; my only reboots being necessary for the monthly
"Patch Tuesday" Microsoft OS updates.

- Dov

> -Original Message-
> From: framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com [mailto:framers-bounces at 
> lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of
> Reng, Dr. Winfried
> Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2009 12:28 AM
> To: framers at lists.frameusers.com
> Subject: RE: Soliciting hardware recommendations
> 
> Hi,
> 
> > If you get an Intel Core 2 Duo (or Core 2 Quad) system, running at
> > 2.6GHz or higher, with 4GB of DDR2 RAM and 7200rpm drives
> > (RAID 0 might
> > be a bit of overkill but easy enough to do), Windows Vista Business
> > 64-bit, and something like an nVidia 9600GT card or better, you will
> > have *more* than enough power to run FrameMaker with excellent
> > performance. This should cost under $1000 or so ... depending on the
> > other options you want on it.
> 
> Of course you can continue to use a Mac system.
> Only a correction regarding Vista 64 bit. As far
> as I know FrameMaker does not run on 64 bit Vista.
> That was posted here several times.
> 
> Best regards
> 
> Winfried

RE: Customer Support in Adobe is non-existent

[Dov Isaacs]

The problem is not with Acrobat 9.

The problem is that the save as PDF function of FrameMaker 7.0 (since then
Adobe has released 7.1, 7.2, 8.0, and 9.0) simply knows nothing about the
registry settings and the Adobe PDF PostScript printer driver instance used
by more recent versions of Acrobat (i.e, 7.x, 8.x, and 9.x).

Simply stated, your version of FrameMaker is way too old for compatibility
with Acrobat 9. There is no solution that Adobe can provide for you other
than to advise you to upgrade FrameMaker.

It is most unfortunate that Adobe Technical Support did not (or was not capable
of) immediately giving you this information.

- Dov



 -Original Message-
 From: framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com 
 [mailto:framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of
 Garnier Garnier
 Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2009 8:26 PM
 To: framers@lists.frameusers.com
 Subject: Customer Support in Adobe is non-existent
 
 Hello Framers,
 
 Indeed sad to note that Adobe does not bother to resolve customer issues. We 
 have licensed version of
 Acrobat Pro 9.0 and our IT has filed a case ticket as per the vendor/customer 
 policy. Its over 10 days
 now but Adobe has not responded yet. I am still not able to use FM 7.0’s Save 
 as feature after
 installing Acrobat Pro 9.0, inspite of trying all suggestions provided by the 
 Frame users. It does not
 work even on a brand new machine either that has only these two tools 
 installed.  As already mentioned
 keeping the number of user guides in mind it is just feasible to use the 
 watch folder option as
 manually I anyway will have to distill each of the 350+  Frame books  nor do 
 I have the bandwidth to
 modify the script. I have switched to the old distiller as that was the only 
 option left that would
 help me meet the deadline.
 
 Looks like customer support is non-existent in Adobe. I wish I had known this 
 before opting for Adobe
 products.
 
 Garnier
___


You are currently subscribed to Framers as arch...@mail-archive.com.

Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

RE: AcroPro 9.0 FM 7.2 - Do they behave well ?

[Dov Isaacs]

It isn't a matter of whether Acrobat 9 behaves well with FrameMaker 7.2,
but whether FrameMaker 7.2 is compatible with Acrobat 9. I believe that
FrameMaker 7.2's interface with Acrobat is compatible with Acrobat 9.

Adobe Support does not monitor these lists. Call Adobe Customer
Support with regards to license upgrade costs.

- Dov

 -Original Message-
 From: framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com 
 [mailto:framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of
 Ankur Srivastava
 Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2009 9:13 PM
 To: framers@lists.frameusers.com
 Subject: AcroPro 9.0  FM 7.2 - Do they behave well ?
 
 Hello Framers
 
  I have recently switched to Office 2007, which i believe, does not support
 Acrobat Professional 7.0. I downloaded an AcroPro v 9.0 trial version, which
 seems to mingle well with Office 2007.
 
 Apart from Office 2007, I am an exhaustive user of FM 7.2 also. Now, i have
 two queries:
 
 1) Does AcroPro 9.0 behave well with FM 7.2 (i have not tested yet) ?
 2) What is the approximate cost of upgarding five AcroPro 7.0 licenses to
 AcroPro 9.0 (Adobe support, can you help) ?
 
 regards
 Ankur
___


You are currently subscribed to Framers as arch...@mail-archive.com.

Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

RE: Customer Support in Adobe is non-existent

[Dov Isaacs]

Garnier,

I’m absolutely amazed that FrameMaker 7.0 “save as PDF” works at all with 
Acrobat 8. It is contrary
to information that I had internally. I was under the strongest impression that 
FrameMaker 7.1
was the first version that recognized “Adobe PDF” as the Distiller’s printer as 
opposed to
“Acrobat Distiller” used in older Acrobat versions. Guess I was given bad info 
internally.

I suspect that as long as you continue with FrameMaker 7.0, you’ll need to 
avoid upgrades
to Acrobat 9, at least on the systems for which you are relying on the “save as 
PDF” feature.

- Dov

From: Garnier Garnier [mailto:garnier_framescr...@yahoo.co.in]
Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2009 10:35 PM
To: Dov Isaacs
Cc: framers@lists.frameusers.com
Subject: RE: Customer Support in Adobe is non-existent




If that is the case, I would like to know how come FM 7.0p576 is working 
absolutely fine with Acrobat Pro 8.0? The Save As PDF works fine and so does 
the script that all writers use to convert to pdf. All works fine even without 
changing the locations of pdf printer instance or the joboptions. Five writers 
are using FM 7.0 p576 with Acrobat Pro 8.0 and face no issues whatsoever.



Upgrading FM is not so simple because of the volume of manuals that we have. 
Besides the issue is with Acrobat Pro 9.0, therefore there is no reason to 
upgrade. May be I should downgrade to 8.0 instead?



B/R

Garnier







-Original Message-
From: Dov Isaacs [mailto:isa...@adobe.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2009 10:39 AM
To: Garnier Garnier; framers@lists.frameusers.com
Subject: RE: Customer Support in Adobe is non-existent



The problem is not with Acrobat 9.



The problem is that the save as PDF function of FrameMaker 7.0 (since then

Adobe has released 7.1, 7.2, 8.0, and 9.0) simply knows nothing about the

registry settings and the Adobe PDF PostScript printer driver instance used

by more recent versions of Acrobat (i.e, 7.x, 8.x, and 9.x).



Simply stated, your version of FrameMaker is way too old for compatibility

with Acrobat 9. There is no solution that Adobe can provide for you other

than to advise you to upgrade FrameMaker.



It is most unfortunate that Adobe Technical Support did not (or was not capable

of) immediately giving you this information.



 - Dov







 -Original Message-

 From: framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com 
 [mailto:framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of

 Garnier Garnier

 Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2009 8:26 PM

 To: framers@lists.frameusers.com

 Subject: Customer Support in Adobe is non-existent



 Hello Framers,



 Indeed sad to note that Adobe does not bother to resolve customer issues. We 
 have licensed version of

 Acrobat Pro 9.0 and our IT has filed a case ticket as per the vendor/customer 
 policy. Its over 10 days

 now but Adobe has not responded yet. I am still not able to use FM 7.0’s Save 
 as feature after

 installing Acrobat Pro 9.0, inspite of trying all suggestions provided by the 
 Frame users. It does not

 work even on a brand new machine either that has only these two tools 
 installed.  As already mentioned

 keeping the number of user guides in mind it is just feasible to use the 
 watch folder option as

 manually I anyway will have to distill each of the 350+  Frame books  nor do 
 I have the bandwidth to

 modify the script. I have switched to the old distiller as that was the only 
 option left that would

 help me meet the deadline.



 Looks like customer support is non-existent in Adobe. I wish I had known this 
 before opting for Adobe

 products.



 Garnier



Yahoo! recommends that you upgrade to the new and safer Internet Explorer 
8http://in.rd.yahoo.com/tagline_ie8_1/*http:/downloads.yahoo.com/in/internetexplorer/.
___


You are currently subscribed to Framers as arch...@mail-archive.com.

Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

Customer Support in Adobe is non-existent

[Dov Isaacs]

The problem is not with Acrobat 9.

The problem is that the "save as PDF" function of FrameMaker 7.0 (since then
Adobe has released 7.1, 7.2, 8.0, and 9.0) simply knows nothing about the
registry settings and the "Adobe PDF" PostScript printer driver instance used
by more recent versions of Acrobat (i.e, 7.x, 8.x, and 9.x).

Simply stated, your version of FrameMaker is way too old for compatibility
with Acrobat 9. There is no solution that Adobe can provide for you other
than to advise you to upgrade FrameMaker.

It is most unfortunate that Adobe Technical Support did not (or was not capable
of) immediately giving you this information.

- Dov



> -Original Message-
> From: framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com [mailto:framers-bounces at 
> lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of
> Garnier Garnier
> Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2009 8:26 PM
> To: framers at lists.frameusers.com
> Subject: Customer Support in Adobe is non-existent
> 
> Hello Framers,
> 
> Indeed sad to note that Adobe does not bother to resolve customer issues. We 
> have licensed version of
> Acrobat Pro 9.0 and our IT has filed a case ticket as per the vendor/customer 
> policy. Its over 10 days
> now but Adobe has not responded yet. I am still not able to use FM 7.0?s Save 
> as feature after
> installing Acrobat Pro 9.0, inspite of trying all suggestions provided by the 
> Frame users. It does not
> work even on a brand new machine either that has only these two tools 
> installed. ?As already mentioned
> keeping the number of user guides in mind it is just feasible to use the 
> watch folder option as
> manually I anyway will have to distill each of the 350+? Frame books? nor do 
> I have the bandwidth to
> modify the script. I have switched to the old distiller as that was the only 
> option left that would
> help me meet the deadline.
> 
> Looks like customer support is non-existent in Adobe. I wish I had known this 
> before opting for Adobe
> products.
> 
> Garnier

AcroPro 9.0 & FM 7.2 - Do they behave well ?

[Dov Isaacs]

It isn't a matter of whether Acrobat 9 "behaves well" with FrameMaker 7.2,
but whether FrameMaker 7.2 is compatible with Acrobat 9. I believe that
FrameMaker 7.2's interface with Acrobat is compatible with Acrobat 9.

"Adobe Support" does not monitor these lists. Call Adobe Customer
Support with regards to license upgrade costs.

- Dov

> -Original Message-
> From: framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com [mailto:framers-bounces at 
> lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of
> Ankur Srivastava
> Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2009 9:13 PM
> To: framers at lists.frameusers.com
> Subject: AcroPro 9.0 & FM 7.2 - Do they behave well ?
> 
> Hello Framers
> 
>  I have recently switched to Office 2007, which i believe, does not support
> Acrobat Professional 7.0. I downloaded an AcroPro v 9.0 trial version, which
> seems to mingle well with Office 2007.
> 
> Apart from Office 2007, I am an exhaustive user of FM 7.2 also. Now, i have
> two queries:
> 
> 1) Does AcroPro 9.0 behave well with FM 7.2 (i have not tested yet) ?
> 2) What is the approximate cost of upgarding five AcroPro 7.0 licenses to
> AcroPro 9.0 (Adobe support, can you help) ?
> 
> regards
> Ankur

Customer Support in Adobe is non-existent

[Dov Isaacs]

Garnier,

I?m absolutely amazed that FrameMaker 7.0 ?save as PDF? works at all with 
Acrobat 8. It is contrary
to information that I had internally. I was under the strongest impression that 
FrameMaker 7.1
was the first version that recognized ?Adobe PDF? as the Distiller?s printer as 
opposed to
?Acrobat Distiller? used in older Acrobat versions. Guess I was given bad info 
internally.

I suspect that as long as you continue with FrameMaker 7.0, you?ll need to 
avoid upgrades
to Acrobat 9, at least on the systems for which you are relying on the ?save as 
PDF? feature.

- Dov

From: Garnier Garnier [mailto:garnier_framescr...@yahoo.co.in]
Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2009 10:35 PM
To: Dov Isaacs
Cc: framers at lists.frameusers.com
Subject: RE: Customer Support in Adobe is non-existent




If that is the case, I would like to know how come FM 7.0p576 is working 
absolutely fine with Acrobat Pro 8.0? The Save As PDF works fine and so does 
the script that all writers use to convert to pdf. All works fine even without 
changing the locations of pdf printer instance or the joboptions. Five writers 
are using FM 7.0 p576 with Acrobat Pro 8.0 and face no issues whatsoever.



Upgrading FM is not so simple because of the volume of manuals that we have. 
Besides the issue is with Acrobat Pro 9.0, therefore there is no reason to 
upgrade. May be I should downgrade to 8.0 instead?



B/R

Garnier







-Original Message-
From: Dov Isaacs [mailto:isa...@adobe.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2009 10:39 AM
To: Garnier Garnier; framers at lists.frameusers.com
Subject: RE: Customer Support in Adobe is non-existent



The problem is not with Acrobat 9.



The problem is that the "save as PDF" function of FrameMaker 7.0 (since then

Adobe has released 7.1, 7.2, 8.0, and 9.0) simply knows nothing about the

registry settings and the "Adobe PDF" PostScript printer driver instance used

by more recent versions of Acrobat (i.e, 7.x, 8.x, and 9.x).



Simply stated, your version of FrameMaker is way too old for compatibility

with Acrobat 9. There is no solution that Adobe can provide for you other

than to advise you to upgrade FrameMaker.



It is most unfortunate that Adobe Technical Support did not (or was not capable

of) immediately giving you this information.



 - Dov







> -Original Message-

> From: framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com [mailto:framers-bounces at 
> lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of

> Garnier Garnier

> Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2009 8:26 PM

> To: framers at lists.frameusers.com

> Subject: Customer Support in Adobe is non-existent

>

> Hello Framers,

>

> Indeed sad to note that Adobe does not bother to resolve customer issues. We 
> have licensed version of

> Acrobat Pro 9.0 and our IT has filed a case ticket as per the vendor/customer 
> policy. Its over 10 days

> now but Adobe has not responded yet. I am still not able to use FM 7.0?s Save 
> as feature after

> installing Acrobat Pro 9.0, inspite of trying all suggestions provided by the 
> Frame users. It does not

> work even on a brand new machine either that has only these two tools 
> installed.  As already mentioned

> keeping the number of user guides in mind it is just feasible to use the 
> watch folder option as

> manually I anyway will have to distill each of the 350+  Frame books  nor do 
> I have the bandwidth to

> modify the script. I have switched to the old distiller as that was the only 
> option left that would

> help me meet the deadline.

>

> Looks like customer support is non-existent in Adobe. I wish I had known this 
> before opting for Adobe

> products.

>

> Garnier



Yahoo! recommends that you upgrade to the new and safer Internet Explorer 
8<http://in.rd.yahoo.com/tagline_ie8_1/*http:/downloads.yahoo.com/in/internetexplorer/>.

RE: PDF headaches

[Dov Isaacs]

Jenny,

PostScript does NOT in any way support transparency. It is not part of
the PostScript imaging model. EPS is PostScript. There is no transparency
in EPS because there is no transparency in PostScript.

Perhaps you are referring to content without a background? That is not
transparency. Or perhaps you are referring to an image with a clipping
path such that some arbitrary shape of an image is on top of a clear
background? Again, that is not transparency.

I am not trying to quibble here, but make sure that we are all using the
same terminology. Conventional graphic arts terminology for transparent
is to describe all non-opaque objects (which quite frankly, should really
have been described as translucent - but I'm a dumb engineer, not an
English major and those who came up with the term transparent to describe
non-opaque objects were probably not English majors either!).

In terms of clipping paths or clear backgrounds behind either text or vector
objects, there should be no difference whatsoever between creating PDF via
save as or via printing to the Adobe PDF PostScript printer driver instance
since in both cases, the EPS content is sent through into the output PostScript
stream unmodified.

- Dov



 -Original Message-
 From: Jenny Greenleaf [mailto:jgreenl...@mac.com]
 Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2009 2:00 PM
 To: Dov Isaacs
 Subject: Re: PDF headaches
 
 FrameMaker 9.0 will handle a graphic in EPS that has a transparent
 background. Really!
 
 Jenny
 
 
 On Jul 7, 2009, at 1:57 PM, Dov Isaacs wrote:
 
  What do YOU mean by transparency? If you are talking about support
  for non-opaque
  objects, then with FrameMaker you are plain out of luck.
  FrameMaker's imaging model,
  unlike that of InDesign, Illustrator, and Photoshop, does not
  support anything other
  than opaque objects. Or do you mean something totally different?!?
 
  - Dov
 
  -Original Message-
  From: framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com 
  [mailto:framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com
  ] On Behalf Of
  Jenny Greenleaf
  Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2009 1:54 PM
  To: framers@lists.frameusers.com
  Subject: PDF headaches
 
  FrameMaker 9.0 (all patches installed)
  Running in a Windows XP VM on a recent MacBook Pro (4 GB)
  Adobe Acrobat Pro Extended 9
  No additional external Frame tools or plugins
 
  I am having trouble PDF'ing my book and hope you can help. I am not
  an
  expert in either of these tools.
 
  When I print to the Adobe PDF printer, I do not get the
  transparency I
  need for the cover graphic.
  When I use Save As PDF, I get the transparency, but the first cross-
  reference in the mini-TOC at the beginning of each chapter is
  gibberish (random characters).
 
  I have tried both of these with Standard options and High-Quality
  print options, as well as a set of options that embeds the corporate
  font.
 
  If I have to, I can PDF the cover separately, but I would rather not.
 
  Any clues? Thanks in advance.
 
  Jenny
  Greenleaf Agency, LLC
  Portland, OR

___


You are currently subscribed to Framers as arch...@mail-archive.com.

Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

RE: PDF headaches

[Dov Isaacs]

Jenny,

I DON'T disbelieve that you are seeing what you report. The question is
what is causing something that isn't supposed to happen.

If you were able to e-mail an example document with this problem (the background
problem, not the cross-reference problem) off-list (including the PNG
background and EPS over it pages), I'd love to see what's going on.

By the way, were you using the CMYK versus RGB settings?

- Dov



 -Original Message-
 From: framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com 
 [mailto:framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of
 Jenny Greenleaf
 Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2009 2:59 PM
 To: framers@lists.frameusers.com
 Subject: Re: PDF headaches
 
 Thanks, Dov,
 
 Let me clarify:
 
 I have an EPS file that has content without a background. It's an
 irregularly shaped object (a monitor). When I place the EPS image on a
 background (png), it appears as desired when I do Save As PDF.
 
 If I PDF the same file by printing to the PDF printer, the irregularly
 shaped object is appears in a white rectangle, spoiling the effect.
 
 I was quite happy with Save As PDF, even though people say they have
 trouble with it. If I could figure out why it suddenly started turning
 my cross-references into gibberish, I would stick with it.
 
 I realize there should be no difference between the two methods.
 However, I have run these PDFs over and over again on the same files.
 I have used the same set of job options both with the Print to PDF and
 the Save As PDF. I was systematic and recorded the results in a
 notebook. I am not making this up!
 
 I understand that you don't find the word transparent to be precise.
 I don't know what other word to use.
 
 Jenny
 
 
 
 
 On Jul 7, 2009, at 2:09 PM, Dov Isaacs wrote:
 
  Jenny,
 
  PostScript does NOT in any way support transparency. It is not part of
  the PostScript imaging model. EPS is PostScript. There is no
  transparency
  in EPS because there is no transparency in PostScript.
 
  Perhaps you are referring to content without a background? That is not
  transparency. Or perhaps you are referring to an image with a clipping
  path such that some arbitrary shape of an image is on top of a clear
  background? Again, that is not transparency.
 
  I am not trying to quibble here, but make sure that we are all using
  the
  same terminology. Conventional graphic arts terminology for
  transparent
  is to describe all non-opaque objects (which quite frankly, should
  really
  have been described as translucent - but I'm a dumb engineer, not an
  English major and those who came up with the term transparent to
  describe
  non-opaque objects were probably not English majors either!).
 
  In terms of clipping paths or clear backgrounds behind either text
  or vector
  objects, there should be no difference whatsoever between creating
  PDF via
  save as or via printing to the Adobe PDF PostScript printer
  driver instance
  since in both cases, the EPS content is sent through into the output
  PostScript
  stream unmodified.
 
  - Dov
 
 
 
  -Original Message-
  From: Jenny Greenleaf [mailto:jgreenl...@mac.com]
  Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2009 2:00 PM
  To: Dov Isaacs
  Subject: Re: PDF headaches
 
  FrameMaker 9.0 will handle a graphic in EPS that has a transparent
  background. Really!
 
  Jenny
 
 
  On Jul 7, 2009, at 1:57 PM, Dov Isaacs wrote:
 
  What do YOU mean by transparency? If you are talking about support
  for non-opaque
  objects, then with FrameMaker you are plain out of luck.
  FrameMaker's imaging model,
  unlike that of InDesign, Illustrator, and Photoshop, does not
  support anything other
  than opaque objects. Or do you mean something totally different?!?
 
- Dov
 
  -Original Message-
  From: framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com 
  [mailto:framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com
  ] On Behalf Of
  Jenny Greenleaf
  Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2009 1:54 PM
  To: framers@lists.frameusers.com
  Subject: PDF headaches
 
  FrameMaker 9.0 (all patches installed)
  Running in a Windows XP VM on a recent MacBook Pro (4 GB)
  Adobe Acrobat Pro Extended 9
  No additional external Frame tools or plugins
 
  I am having trouble PDF'ing my book and hope you can help. I am not
  an
  expert in either of these tools.
 
  When I print to the Adobe PDF printer, I do not get the
  transparency I
  need for the cover graphic.
  When I use Save As PDF, I get the transparency, but the first
  cross-
  reference in the mini-TOC at the beginning of each chapter is
  gibberish (random characters).
 
  I have tried both of these with Standard options and High-Quality
  print options, as well as a set of options that embeds the
  corporate
  font.
 
  If I have to, I can PDF the cover separately, but I would rather
  not.
 
  Any clues? Thanks in advance.
 
  Jenny
  Greenleaf Agency, LLC
  Portland, OR
 
  ___
 
 
  You are currently subscribed to Framers as jgreenl...@mac.com.
 
  Send list

PDF headaches

[Dov Isaacs]

Jenny,

PostScript does NOT in any way support transparency. It is not part of
the PostScript imaging model. EPS is PostScript. There is no "transparency"
in EPS because there is no transparency in PostScript.

Perhaps you are referring to content without a background? That is not
transparency. Or perhaps you are referring to an image with a clipping
path such that some arbitrary shape of an image is on top of a clear
background? Again, that is not transparency.

I am not trying to quibble here, but make sure that we are all using the
same terminology. Conventional graphic arts terminology for "transparent"
is to describe all non-opaque objects (which quite frankly, should really
have been described as "translucent" - but I'm a dumb engineer, not an
English major and those who came up with the term "transparent" to describe
non-opaque objects were probably not English majors either!).

In terms of clipping paths or clear backgrounds behind either text or vector
objects, there should be no difference whatsoever between creating PDF via
"save as" or via printing to the "Adobe PDF" PostScript printer driver instance
since in both cases, the EPS content is sent through into the output PostScript
stream unmodified.

- Dov



> -Original Message-
> From: Jenny Greenleaf [mailto:jgreenleaf at mac.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2009 2:00 PM
> To: Dov Isaacs
> Subject: Re: PDF headaches
> 
> FrameMaker 9.0 will handle a graphic in EPS that has a transparent
> background. Really!
> 
> Jenny
> 
> 
> On Jul 7, 2009, at 1:57 PM, Dov Isaacs wrote:
> 
> > What do YOU mean by transparency? If you are talking about support
> > for non-opaque
> > objects, then with FrameMaker you are plain out of luck.
> > FrameMaker's imaging model,
> > unlike that of InDesign, Illustrator, and Photoshop, does not
> > support anything other
> > than opaque objects. Or do you mean something totally different?!?
> >
> > - Dov
> >
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com [mailto:framers-bounces at 
> >> lists.frameusers.com
> >> ] On Behalf Of
> >> Jenny Greenleaf
> >> Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2009 1:54 PM
> >> To: framers at lists.frameusers.com
> >> Subject: PDF headaches
> >>
> >> FrameMaker 9.0 (all patches installed)
> >> Running in a Windows XP VM on a recent MacBook Pro (4 GB)
> >> Adobe Acrobat Pro Extended 9
> >> No additional external Frame tools or plugins
> >>
> >> I am having trouble PDF'ing my book and hope you can help. I am not
> >> an
> >> expert in either of these tools.
> >>
> >> When I print to the Adobe PDF printer, I do not get the
> >> transparency I
> >> need for the cover graphic.
> >> When I use Save As PDF, I get the transparency, but the first cross-
> >> reference in the mini-TOC at the beginning of each chapter is
> >> gibberish (random characters).
> >>
> >> I have tried both of these with Standard options and High-Quality
> >> print options, as well as a set of options that embeds the corporate
> >> font.
> >>
> >> If I have to, I can PDF the cover separately, but I would rather not.
> >>
> >> Any clues? Thanks in advance.
> >>
> >> Jenny
> >> Greenleaf Agency, LLC
> >> Portland, OR

PDF headaches

[Dov Isaacs]

Jenny,

I DON'T disbelieve that you are seeing what you report. The question is
what is causing something that isn't supposed to happen.

If you were able to e-mail an example document with this problem (the background
problem, not the cross-reference problem) off-list (including the PNG
background and EPS over it pages), I'd love to see what's going on.

By the way, were you using the CMYK versus RGB settings?

- Dov



> -Original Message-
> From: framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com [mailto:framers-bounces at 
> lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of
> Jenny Greenleaf
> Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2009 2:59 PM
> To: framers at lists.frameusers.com
> Subject: Re: PDF headaches
> 
> Thanks, Dov,
> 
> Let me clarify:
> 
> I have an EPS file that has content without a background. It's an
> irregularly shaped object (a monitor). When I place the EPS image on a
> background (png), it appears as desired when I do Save As PDF.
> 
> If I PDF the same file by printing to the PDF printer, the irregularly
> shaped object is appears in a white rectangle, spoiling the effect.
> 
> I was quite happy with Save As PDF, even though people say they have
> trouble with it. If I could figure out why it suddenly started turning
> my cross-references into gibberish, I would stick with it.
> 
> I realize there should be no difference between the two methods.
> However, I have run these PDFs over and over again on the same files.
> I have used the same set of job options both with the Print to PDF and
> the Save As PDF. I was systematic and recorded the results in a
> notebook. I am not making this up!
> 
> I understand that you don't find the word "transparent" to be precise.
> I don't know what other word to use.
> 
> Jenny
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Jul 7, 2009, at 2:09 PM, Dov Isaacs wrote:
> 
> > Jenny,
> >
> > PostScript does NOT in any way support transparency. It is not part of
> > the PostScript imaging model. EPS is PostScript. There is no
> > "transparency"
> > in EPS because there is no transparency in PostScript.
> >
> > Perhaps you are referring to content without a background? That is not
> > transparency. Or perhaps you are referring to an image with a clipping
> > path such that some arbitrary shape of an image is on top of a clear
> > background? Again, that is not transparency.
> >
> > I am not trying to quibble here, but make sure that we are all using
> > the
> > same terminology. Conventional graphic arts terminology for
> > "transparent"
> > is to describe all non-opaque objects (which quite frankly, should
> > really
> > have been described as "translucent" - but I'm a dumb engineer, not an
> > English major and those who came up with the term "transparent" to
> > describe
> > non-opaque objects were probably not English majors either!).
> >
> > In terms of clipping paths or clear backgrounds behind either text
> > or vector
> > objects, there should be no difference whatsoever between creating
> > PDF via
> > "save as" or via printing to the "Adobe PDF" PostScript printer
> > driver instance
> > since in both cases, the EPS content is sent through into the output
> > PostScript
> > stream unmodified.
> >
> > - Dov
> >
> >
> >
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: Jenny Greenleaf [mailto:jgreenleaf at mac.com]
> >> Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2009 2:00 PM
> >> To: Dov Isaacs
> >> Subject: Re: PDF headaches
> >>
> >> FrameMaker 9.0 will handle a graphic in EPS that has a transparent
> >> background. Really!
> >>
> >> Jenny
> >>
> >>
> >> On Jul 7, 2009, at 1:57 PM, Dov Isaacs wrote:
> >>
> >>> What do YOU mean by transparency? If you are talking about support
> >>> for non-opaque
> >>> objects, then with FrameMaker you are plain out of luck.
> >>> FrameMaker's imaging model,
> >>> unlike that of InDesign, Illustrator, and Photoshop, does not
> >>> support anything other
> >>> than opaque objects. Or do you mean something totally different?!?
> >>>
> >>>   - Dov
> >>>
> >>>> -Original Message-
> >>>> From: framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com [mailto:framers-bounces at 
> >>>> lists.frameusers.com
> >>>> ] On Behalf Of
> >>>> Jenny Greenleaf
> >>>> Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2009 1:54 PM
> >>>> To: framers at lists.frameusers.com
> 

RE: Save As not working with Acrobat Pro 9.0- issue still not resolved

[Dov Isaacs]

To be as clear as possible, the save as PDF feature of FrameMaker 7 is not at 
all
compatible with Acrobat 7, 8, or 9!

- Dov

___


You are currently subscribed to Framers as arch...@mail-archive.com.

Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

Save As not working with Acrobat Pro 9.0- issue still not resolved

[Dov Isaacs]

To be as clear as possible, the "save as PDF" feature of FrameMaker 7 is not at 
all
compatible with Acrobat 7, 8, or 9!

- Dov

RE: Save As not working with Acrobat Pro 9.0

[Dov Isaacs]

Exactly what version of FrameMaker are you using with Acrobat 9?

If you are using versions of FrameMaker earlier than 7.2, what you are 
experiencing
would naturally be expected. Why? Acrobat 7 changed the name of the PostScript 
printer
driver instance from Acrobat Distiller (or some name similar to that) to 
Adobe PDF.
I believe that FrameMaker 7.2 was the first version of FrameMaker to 
coordinate with
that name change.

- Dov

 -Original Message-
 From: framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com 
 [mailto:framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of
 Garnier Garnier
 Sent: Monday, June 29, 2009 12:06 AM
 To: framers@lists.frameusers.com
 Subject: Save As not working with Acrobat Pro 9.0
 
 
 Hello listers,
 
 After installing Acrobat Pro 9.0 the “Save As” option has ceased to work and 
 throws an error “the
 selected job option does not exist in the current installation. Create a job 
 option or select an
 existing job option” Selecting OK throws another error “Framemaker could not 
 find Acrobat Distiller
 instance. The distiller instance must be installed to execute the Save As 
 command”. So am compelled to
 distill to .ps and then to pdf. From some of the earlier posts this seems to 
 be a known error. Is it
 so?
 
 How do I fix this issue?
 
 B/R
 Garnier
___


You are currently subscribed to Framers as arch...@mail-archive.com.

Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

Interference from Printer Resident Fonts (Was: Save As not working with Acrobat Pro 9.0)

[Dov Isaacs]

There is another solution to this problem and it is associated with the PPD 
files themselves
and their support for printer resident fonts. At one time (over 18 years 
ago), it was
considered useful for PostScript printers to have resident fonts such that 
less memory
was needed in the printer and more importantly, smaller data streams needed to 
be sent to
the printer with each job. One was able to assume that all the fonts listed in 
the PPD
file were resident and available in the printer.

Unfortunately, Windows' internal font enumeration mechanism treated those 
printer-resident
fonts as if they actually existed on the host computer as well which has led to 
all sorts
of problems over the years. Other Adobe applications, such as InDesign, 
Illustrator, and
Photoshop handled these issues by doing their own font enumeration including 
only those 
fonts resident on the user's host computer and totally ignoring any fonts 
specified by
the PPD files for PostScript printers or otherwise treated as printer-resident 
by 
non-PostScript printer drivers.

For PostScript printer driver instances, the fix has been to edit the PPD files 
to
eliminate all references to resident fonts except for Courier. Then delete the 
corresponding
.BPD files.

- Dov



 -Original Message-
 From: Fred Ridder
 Sent: Monday, June 29, 2009 6:15 AM
 To: generic...@yahoo.ca; garnier_framescr...@yahoo.co.in
 Cc: framers@lists.frameusers.com
 Subject: RE: Save As not working with Acrobat Pro 9.0
 
 
 Not exactly correct, Nadine. The message that Garnier refers to occurs 
 whenever you change the printer
 you have selected--for example when you change from your system's default 
 printer to the Adobe PDF
 printer. The reason for the message is that on a Windows system the 
 information on font metrics (the
 dimensions of individual glyphs) come from the printer driver; when you 
 change to a different printer,
 you change to a differen driver and a different database of font metrics, 
 hence the warning.
 
 One solution is to set the Adobe PDF virtual printer as your system default, 
 so that there is no
 change in the printer selection when you make a PDF. Another approach is to 
 downoal and install the
 SetPrint plug-in from sundorne.com, which allows you to set the default 
 printer _for_FrameMaker_
 independently from the system printer selection.
 
 But if the fonts that appear in the document itself change, it is an 
 indication that Garnier has not
 correctly configured the font locations in Distiller after installing the 
 Acrobat suite, and/or that
 Garnier's document uses a font that is resident in some phyiscal printer but 
 not installed in soft
 form on the local system. Fonts have to be accessible to the Distiller 
 (located on local or network
 drives in locations that are set up in the Distiller Font Locations 
 configuration) for the Adobe PDF
 printer to be able to use them.
 
 -Fred Ridder
 
 
  Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 07:17:44 -0400
  From: generic...@yahoo.ca
  To: garnier_framescr...@yahoo.co.in
  Subject: Re: Save As not working with Acrobat Pro 9.0
  CC: framers@lists.frameusers.com
 
  I believe that means that the Adobe PDF printer does not support the
  font that you used for your headers.
 
  Nadine
 
  Garnier Garnier wrote:
   Please excuse the contents of another mail(direct offline response) that 
   was attached accidently
 in the earlier mail.
  
  
   Yes I am aware of the same and hence I was trying to clarify the 
   same,that is a known error.
  
   File Print option Adobe PDF throws Font information on your system has 
   changed error and
 changes the fonts (used in headings.
  
   I have uninstalled the Acrobat 5.0 before installing Acrobat Pro 9.0.
  
   B/R
   Garnier
___


You are currently subscribed to Framers as arch...@mail-archive.com.

Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

Save As not working with Acrobat Pro 9.0

[Dov Isaacs]

Exactly what version of FrameMaker are you using with Acrobat 9?

If you are using versions of FrameMaker earlier than 7.2, what you are 
experiencing
would naturally be expected. Why? Acrobat 7 changed the name of the PostScript 
printer
driver instance from "Acrobat Distiller" (or some name similar to that) to 
"Adobe PDF."
I believe that FrameMaker 7.2 was the first version of FrameMaker to 
"coordinate" with
that name change.

- Dov

> -Original Message-
> From: framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com [mailto:framers-bounces at 
> lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of
> Garnier Garnier
> Sent: Monday, June 29, 2009 12:06 AM
> To: framers at lists.frameusers.com
> Subject: Save As not working with Acrobat Pro 9.0
> 
> 
> Hello listers,
> 
> After installing Acrobat Pro 9.0 the ?Save As? option has ceased to work and 
> throws an error ?the
> selected job option does not exist in the current installation. Create a job 
> option or select an
> existing job option? Selecting OK throws another error ?Framemaker could not 
> find Acrobat Distiller
> instance. The distiller instance must be installed to execute the Save As 
> command?. So am compelled to
> distill to .ps and then to pdf. From some of the earlier posts this seems to 
> be a known error. Is it
> so?
> 
> How do I fix this issue?
> 
> B/R
> Garnier

Interference from Printer Resident Fonts (Was: Save As not working with Acrobat Pro 9.0)

[Dov Isaacs]

There is another solution to this problem and it is associated with the PPD 
files themselves
and their support for "printer resident fonts." At one time (over 18 years 
ago), it was
considered useful for PostScript printers to have "resident fonts" such that 
less memory
was needed in the printer and more importantly, smaller data streams needed to 
be sent to
the printer with each job. One was able to assume that all the fonts listed in 
the PPD
file were resident and available in the printer.

Unfortunately, Windows' internal font enumeration mechanism treated those 
printer-resident
fonts as if they actually existed on the host computer as well which has led to 
all sorts
of problems over the years. Other Adobe applications, such as InDesign, 
Illustrator, and
Photoshop handled these issues by doing their own font enumeration including 
only those 
fonts resident on the user's host computer and totally ignoring any fonts 
specified by
the PPD files for PostScript printers or otherwise treated as printer-resident 
by 
non-PostScript printer drivers.

For PostScript printer driver instances, the fix has been to edit the PPD files 
to
eliminate all references to resident fonts except for Courier. Then delete the 
corresponding
.BPD files.

- Dov



> -Original Message-
> From: Fred Ridder
> Sent: Monday, June 29, 2009 6:15 AM
> To: generic668 at yahoo.ca; garnier_framescript at yahoo.co.in
> Cc: framers at lists.frameusers.com
> Subject: RE: Save As not working with Acrobat Pro 9.0
> 
> 
> Not exactly correct, Nadine. The message that Garnier refers to occurs 
> whenever you change the printer
> you have selected--for example when you change from your system's default 
> printer to the Adobe PDF
> printer. The reason for the message is that on a Windows system the 
> information on font metrics (the
> dimensions of individual glyphs) come from the printer driver; when you 
> change to a different printer,
> you change to a differen driver and a different database of font metrics, 
> hence the warning.
> 
> One solution is to set the Adobe PDF virtual printer as your system default, 
> so that there is no
> change in the printer selection when you make a PDF. Another approach is to 
> downoal and install the
> SetPrint plug-in from sundorne.com, which allows you to set the default 
> printer _for_FrameMaker_
> independently from the system printer selection.
> 
> But if the fonts that appear in the document itself change, it is an 
> indication that Garnier has not
> correctly configured the font locations in Distiller after installing the 
> Acrobat suite, and/or that
> Garnier's document uses a font that is resident in some phyiscal printer but 
> not installed in "soft"
> form on the local system. Fonts have to be accessible to the Distiller 
> (located on local or network
> drives in locations that are set up in the Distiller Font Locations 
> configuration) for the Adobe PDF
> printer to be able to use them.
> 
> -Fred Ridder
> 
> 
> > Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 07:17:44 -0400
> > From: generic668 at yahoo.ca
> > To: garnier_framescript at yahoo.co.in
> > Subject: Re: Save As not working with Acrobat Pro 9.0
> > CC: framers at lists.frameusers.com
> >
> > I believe that means that the Adobe PDF printer does not support the
> > font that you used for your headers.
> >
> > Nadine
> >
> > Garnier Garnier wrote:
> > > Please excuse the contents of another mail(direct offline response) that 
> > > was attached accidently
> in the earlier mail.
> > >
> > >
> > > Yes I am aware of the same and hence I was trying to clarify the 
> > > same,that is a known error.
> > >
> > > File >Print option >Adobe PDF throws "Font information on your system has 
> > > changed" error and
> changes the fonts (used in headings.
> > >
> > > I have uninstalled the Acrobat 5.0 before installing Acrobat Pro 9.0.
> > >
> > > B/R
> > > Garnier

RE: Installing Acrobat 9.0 taking FOREVER??!?

[Dov Isaacs]

Deletion of a file normally does not result in any registry modifications
whatsoever! When you delete a file, changes are made to the directory
entries and the space allocation tables on your disk partition. That should
be it. Taking several minutes just to delete a 2KB file using Windows
Explorer is indicative of other major problems with your particular
computer system, possible corruption of your disk directories and
allocation tables and/or disk fragmentation.

- Dov

 -Original Message-
 From: Jim Owens
 Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2009 8:12 AM
 
 Sometimes it takes my system several minutes just to delete a 2KB file
 using Windows Explorer. I assume that the registry is being updated in
 hundreds of places.
 
___


You are currently subscribed to Framers as arch...@mail-archive.com.

Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

Installing Acrobat 9.0 taking FOREVER??!?

[Dov Isaacs]

Although the Acrobat 9 Pro installation does take a tremendous amount of disk 
space
(of which nearly 725MB are the installation files so that Acrobat can "self 
heal"
when there are problems), that does not account for the two hour installation 
cited.

I have performed Acrobat 9 Pro Extended installations on nearly a dozen systems 
and
none took more than about twenty minutes (all installation options were 
selected).
Perhaps on the system in question, the disk partition was highly fragmented? 
That
could account for extended installation times (although even with fragmentation,
two hours is ludicrous).

- Dov

> -Original Message-
> From: David Schor
> Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2009 7:34 AM
> 
> John,
> 
> I just installed a new license for Acrobat 9 Pro Complete Version on my
> computer here at work yesterday, and I noticed that the folder for the
> program in the Program Files folder is a whopping 1.85 GB, containing 6,416
> files in 882 subfolders.
> 
> Now you know why installation seems to take forever.
> 
> All the best,
> David
> 
> On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 5:20 PM, John Hedtke  wrote:
> 
> > I just re-installed Acrobat 9.0 Pro Extended off the Adobe TCS 2.0
> > and it took very close to two hours.  Nope, nothing special, but the
> > histogram just s-l-o-w-l-y crawled across the screen and a mere two
> > hours later, it seemed to be done.
> >
> > Is this normal for Acrobat 9.0 or for the Tech Comm Suite 2.0?  I
> > have no way of knowing and there's no telling what Adobe may consider
> > acceptable.  Thoughts?
> >
> >
> > Yours truly,
> >
> > John Hedtke

Installing Acrobat 9.0 taking FOREVER??!?

[Dov Isaacs]

Deletion of a file normally does not result in any registry modifications
whatsoever! When you delete a file, changes are made to the directory
entries and the space allocation tables on your disk partition. That should
be it. Taking "several minutes just to delete a 2KB file using Windows
Explorer" is indicative of other major problems with your particular
computer system, possible corruption of your disk directories and
allocation tables and/or disk fragmentation.

- Dov

> -Original Message-
> From: Jim Owens
> Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2009 8:12 AM
> 
> Sometimes it takes my system several minutes just to delete a 2KB file
> using Windows Explorer. I assume that the registry is being updated in
> hundreds of places.
> 

RE: Patches for FM9 in TCS2

[Dov Isaacs]

Actually, the Adobe Technical Communication Suite 2 doesn't come on a CD but 
rather,
on two DVDs!

And no, Adobe is not releasing TCS2 to include the first set of FrameMaker 9 
patches.
You will need to apply those yourself after installation.

- Dov

 -Original Message-
 From: framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com 
 [mailto:framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of
 Diane Gaskill
 Sent: Friday, March 20, 2009 11:38 AM
 To: fram...@lists. Frameusers. Com
 Subject: Patches for FM9 in TCS2
 
 Hi all,
 
 Some of the writers in my company have ordered the TCS2 CD from Adobe.  We
 are aware of the bugs in FM9 and the patch that Adobe has released.
 
 Does anyone know whether Adobe is applying the patch to FM9 for TCS before
 they are distributing it?  We'd like to know whether we need to install the
 patch before using TCS2.
 
 Thanks,
 Diane Gaskill
 Hitachi Data Systems
___


You are currently subscribed to Framers as arch...@mail-archive.com.

Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

Patches for FM9 in TCS2

[Dov Isaacs]

Actually, the Adobe Technical Communication Suite 2 doesn't come on a CD but 
rather,
on two DVDs!

And no, Adobe is not releasing TCS2 to include the first set of FrameMaker 9 
patches.
You will need to apply those yourself after installation.

- Dov

> -Original Message-
> From: framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com [mailto:framers-bounces at 
> lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of
> Diane Gaskill
> Sent: Friday, March 20, 2009 11:38 AM
> To: Framers at Lists. Frameusers. Com
> Subject: Patches for FM9 in TCS2
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> Some of the writers in my company have ordered the TCS2 CD from Adobe.  We
> are aware of the bugs in FM9 and the patch that Adobe has released.
> 
> Does anyone know whether Adobe is applying the patch to FM9 for TCS before
> they are distributing it?  We'd like to know whether we need to install the
> patch before using TCS2.
> 
> Thanks,
> Diane Gaskill
> Hitachi Data Systems

FrameMaker 9.0.1 Update Now Available ... Come and Get It!

[Dov Isaacs]

The FrameMaker 9.0.1 update has just been released. You can get it via the 
updates 
feature within FrameMaker (or any other current Adobe application).

- Dov

_

List of major issues resolved in this update (from the readme):

1. (Ref‐ 1838069): Type‐ahead functionality of Control key shortcuts (Ctrl+0 to 
Ctrl+9) does not work. However the following are the changes from legacy 
behavior (which are not fixed) :

2274062
Search in type‐ahead area doesn't auto‐start if the next chars match 
with another
tag name

2273267
When focus is on type‐ahead area, with a tag displayed in it, clicking 
in the document
applies that displayed tag. So, one should use “ESC” key to exit from 
the status
bar’s type‐ahead area.

2. (Ref‐ 1884451): When the starting letter is pressed the fly‐out menu of the 
status bar applies the value automatically if there is a SINGLE entry

3. (Ref ‐ 2252804): Inability to control index see characteristics with DITA 
indexterms
The user shall now be able to configure the following things about the index 
see  see‐also features of DITA v1.1:

? The text that shall be used for DITA index see/see‐also keywords. By default 
it shall be “See” and “ See Also” respectively.

? The character format to be used for displaying DITA index see/see‐also text. 
By default it shall be “Emphasis” for both.

These can be configured by using the following entries in the ditafm.ini file:

SeeString=See
SeeAlsoString=See Also
SeeCharFmt=Emphasis
SeeAlsoCharFmt=Emphasis
Earlier these strings  the character formats were imposed by FrameMaker 
itself. The user had no mechanism to modify these at the time of importing a 
DITA document.

4. (Ref ? 2248303): Dita val filter is not working correctly if we have 
conditional text applied on some elements
Following issues related to DITA filtering feature have been identified  fixed 
corresponding to this bug:

? DITAVAL filter incorrect for Gen Compound FM document with a tag (in Show) 
applied to a content to be filtered.

? DITAVAL filter incorrect for Gen FM book with FM components with a tag (in 
Show) applied to a content to be filtered.

? DITAVAL filter incorrect for Gen Compound FM document with a tag (in Hide) 
applied to a content NOT to be filtered.

5. (Ref‐ 2268619): Save As CMYK PDF ‐ imported PDFs are rendered as RGB 
previews only.

6. (Ref‐ 2273344 :) FrameMaker crashes if a wrong file name is given in browse 
dialog while inserting a new topicref (using element catalog) in a Map/BookMap 
file.

7. (Ref‐ 1930191 :) The Para designer panel gets updated even when it is in 
minimized mode.

8. (Ref ? 2253035): Incorrect messages appear in XML Schema Log while using 
German Locale.

9. (Ref ‐ 2251492 ) :Graphics imported by copy are getting dropped in CMYK PDF 
if ConvertGraphicsToEPS flag is On in maker.ini and a RGB PDF is created before 
creating the PDF.

10. (Ref ? 2284304) : File‐preferences‐interface‐  Hide Panel on Close 
,should be checked OFF by default.
This preference was ON by default in 9.0 making the panels stay open in the 
background resulting in slow speed of the system. Now with this fix, the 
make.ini in the installation directory will have HidePanelsOnClose=Off entry. 
Pls. note that if old maker.ini is already present in the user area, one needs 
to manually make HidePanelsOnClose=Off in it. If no maker.ini is present in 
user area, FrameMaker will create one on the first launch automatically
___


You are currently subscribed to Framers as arch...@mail-archive.com.

Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

FrameMaker 9.0.1 Update Now Available ... Come and Get It!

[Dov Isaacs]

The FrameMaker 9.0.1 update has just been released. You can get it via the 
updates 
feature within FrameMaker (or any other current Adobe application).

- Dov

_

List of major issues resolved in this update (from the "readme"):

1. (Ref? 1838069): Type?ahead functionality of Control key shortcuts (Ctrl+0 to 
Ctrl+9) does not work. However the following are the changes from legacy 
behavior (which are not fixed) :

2274062
Search in type?ahead area doesn't auto?start if the next chars match 
with another
tag name

2273267
When focus is on type?ahead area, with a tag displayed in it, clicking 
in the document
applies that displayed tag. So, one should use ?ESC? key to exit from 
the status
bar?s type?ahead area.

2. (Ref? 1884451): When the starting letter is pressed the fly?out menu of the 
status bar applies the value automatically if there is a SINGLE entry

3. (Ref ? 2252804): Inability to control index "see" characteristics with DITA 
indexterms
The user shall now be able to configure the following things about the index 
see & see?also features of DITA v1.1:

? The text that shall be used for DITA index see/see?also keywords. By default 
it shall be ?See? and ? See Also? respectively.

? The character format to be used for displaying DITA index see/see?also text. 
By default it shall be ?Emphasis? for both.

These can be configured by using the following entries in the ditafm.ini file:

SeeString=See
SeeAlsoString=See Also
SeeCharFmt=Emphasis
SeeAlsoCharFmt=Emphasis
Earlier these strings & the character formats were imposed by FrameMaker 
itself. The user had no mechanism to modify these at the time of importing a 
DITA document.

4. (Ref ? 2248303): Dita val filter is not working correctly if we have 
conditional text applied on some elements
Following issues related to DITA filtering feature have been identified & fixed 
corresponding to this bug:

? DITAVAL filter incorrect for "Gen Compound FM document" with a tag (in Show) 
applied to a content to be filtered.

? DITAVAL filter incorrect for "Gen FM book with FM components" with a tag (in 
Show) applied to a content to be filtered.

? DITAVAL filter incorrect for "Gen Compound FM document" with a tag (in Hide) 
applied to a content NOT to be filtered.

5. (Ref? 2268619): Save As CMYK PDF ? imported PDFs are rendered as RGB 
previews only.

6. (Ref? 2273344 :) FrameMaker crashes if a wrong file name is given in browse 
dialog while inserting a new topicref (using element catalog) in a Map/BookMap 
file.

7. (Ref? 1930191 :) The Para designer panel gets updated even when it is in 
minimized mode.

8. (Ref ? 2253035): Incorrect messages appear in XML Schema Log while using 
German Locale.

9. (Ref ? 2251492 ) :Graphics imported by copy are getting dropped in CMYK PDF 
if ConvertGraphicsToEPS flag is On in maker.ini and a RGB PDF is created before 
creating the PDF.

10. (Ref ? 2284304) : File?>preferences?>interface? > Hide Panel on Close 
,should be checked OFF by default.
This preference was ON by default in 9.0 making the panels stay open in the 
background resulting in slow speed of the system. Now with this fix, the 
make.ini in the installation directory will have "HidePanelsOnClose=Off" entry. 
Pls. note that if old maker.ini is already present in the user area, one needs 
to manually make "HidePanelsOnClose=Off" in it. If no maker.ini is present in 
user area, FrameMaker will create one on the first launch automatically

RE: Missing Fonts

[Dov Isaacs]

In terms of safety and reliability, create the PDF only on the system that has 
all
the fonts. Otherwise you cannot count on the fonts mysteriously appearing when 
you
are making plates for the offset press (or printing on any printer for that 
matter!).

- Dov

 -Original Message-
 From: Howard Rauch
 Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2009 6:07 AM
 
 Ths is perhaps an elementary question. I have to finish a project off-site. I 
 am using another
 person's computer, but working on my own  computer through remote access. I 
 need to distill a book to
 PDF, but the computer I am using does not have all the fonts. Remember 
 Missing Font Names is turned
 on. If I distill the book on this computer and send the file to the offset 
 printer, will the correct
 fonts be included int printed document? Or am I better off waiting until I 
 can distil the book on my
 own computer?
 
 Howard Rauch
___


You are currently subscribed to Framers as arch...@mail-archive.com.

Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com
or visit 
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com

Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

Missing Fonts

[Dov Isaacs]

In terms of safety and reliability, create the PDF only on the system that has 
all
the fonts. Otherwise you cannot count on the fonts mysteriously appearing when 
you
are making plates for the offset press (or printing on any printer for that 
matter!).

- Dov

> -Original Message-
> From: Howard Rauch
> Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2009 6:07 AM
> 
> Ths is perhaps an elementary question. I have to finish a project off-site. I 
> am using another
> person's computer, but?working on?my own? computer through remote access. I 
> need to distill a book to
> PDF, but the computer I am using does not have all the fonts. "Remember 
> Missing Font Names" is turned
> on. If I distill the book on this computer and send the file to the offset 
> printer, will the correct
> fonts be included int printed document? Or am I better off waiting until I 
> can distil the book on my
> own?computer?
> 
> Howard Rauch