• 0

Safe to remove Adobe Reader setup files?


Question

14 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0
  TEX4S said:
why on earth does anyone use that fat bloated slow software anyway ??!?!?!

use foxit a never look back !

www.foxitsoftware.com

Oh...and welcome to neowin !

Somewhere along the lines, FoxIt added advertisements to their application. So, the speed boost over adobe reader (which is now, as mentioned above, largely non-existant) was replaced by advertising in your PDF reader. I understand the need to have ads, but it's annoying to the average Joe. And, I'm sure they're removable...but, really, I'd rather not deal with that at all.

  • 0
  Aeden said:
Somewhere along the lines, FoxIt added advertisements to their application. So, the speed boost over adobe reader (which is now, as mentioned above, largely non-existant) was replaced by advertising in your PDF reader. I understand the need to have ads, but it's annoying to the average Joe. And, I'm sure they're removable...but, really, I'd rather not deal with that at all.

Oh damn, I didnt know that - its been awhile since Ive used a .pdf file - and I didnt upgrade to the latest version -

thats a shame - foxit was some software I recommended to many people - oh well...

  • 0
  TEX4S said:
Oh damn, I didnt know that - its been awhile since Ive used a .pdf file - and I didnt upgrade to the latest version -

thats a shame - foxit was some software I recommended to many people - oh well...

yeah its not really needed anymore with the improvements in 8.1 and 9.0 to speed. Heck, I have the full version of Acrobat 9 and when its open with no PDF's loaded its like 20MB of RAM, not too shabby and it starts really fast.

  • 0
  Aeden said:
was replaced by advertising in your PDF reader.
Yeah they are so obtrusive too :rolleyes:

post-14624-1231021686_thumb.jpg

Hmmm lets see abobe reader 33MB download.. foxit 3.7MB -- which one is bloated? ;)

Ok -- I just grabbed the latest adobe.. And sorry it takes atleast a couple of seconds longer to open the same exact pdf. And here -- same pdf opened.. which one is using more memory, handles, etc. Use what you want -- I will live with thos ads ;) vs the bloat that is adobe.

post-14624-1231022280_thumb.jpg

Take a look at the install dir.. 198MB for adobe, less than 10MB for foxit reader.. I say your still ok with suggesting it as a valid alternative ;)

Edited by BudMan
  • 0

Why not do like I used to do-- I used to create a folder to put it in -- with a text file explaining the where it was on my xp install-- then when that folder hits close to 700mb -- burn it to a cd. Just don't forget should you have to repair to copy it back over to the folder you referenced in the text file. (you don't have to create a separate txt file for each moved file -- just append it) that and after you copy it back over change the read only status. That is what I used to do.

But if you are looking for a good program to get rid of "JUNK" files- I suggest CCLEANER.

http://www.ccleaner.com/

Also another handy tool- though make sure that before you use this other program that you copy all the backups files located in your windows direcetory- (burn them to a cd)

Main site-

http://www.dougknox.com/

Hotfix backup removal tool-

http://www.dougknox.com/xp/utils/xp_hotfix_backup.htm

  • 0

The bigger problem with foxiet than the "banner" is that there's some pdf's it just can't handle and it gives very aliased nasty text though.

other than hat the only time I use PDF's anyway is when I look in ig manuals or soemthing, wich usually was back when I worked support. at wich point the search in adober reader is a million times better than foxit.

FoxIt is a great little software, but despite it's flaws and annoying features it insists on installing along with itself, it is a much better software.

and I'd just remove, them though I probably wouldn't know they're there though. but by the time you need them if something should happen, there's probably a new version to download anyway :)

  • 0
  BudMan said:
Yeah they are so obtrusive too :rolleyes:

post-14624-1231021686_thumb.jpg

Hmmm lets see abobe reader 33MB download.. foxit 3.7MB -- which one is bloated? ;)

Ok -- I just grabbed the latest adobe.. And sorry it takes atleast a couple of seconds longer to open the same exact pdf. And here -- same pdf opened.. which one is using more memory, handles, etc. Use what you want -- I will live with thos ads ;) vs the bloat that is adobe.

post-14624-1231022280_thumb.jpg

Take a look at the install dir.. 198MB for adobe, less than 10MB for foxit reader.. I say your still ok with suggesting it as a valid alternative ;)

Eh, Reader 9 still flies on older computer anyhow. And if one has to be concerned with the installer eating up a lot of the space of the actual folder in this day and age, well, you must be running like a 10GB or something hard drive. :) I still get your point though hehe. I guess I don't care much even though I am running on smaller drives being I use raptors over 7200PM on my desktop. :)

Now only if MS would build it into the OS like Mac OS X...oh wait, lawsuit, nevermind! :)

  • 0
  BudMan said:
Yeah they are so obtrusive too :rolleyes:

Now that you mention it, I went ahead and checked up, and sure enough, the ads are (now) able to be turned off. The ads were very much obtrusive back in August, it seems they got the message and changed things. I'm only on Windows now and again; my bad.

  Quote
17. How to remove the Ads?

You can remove the Ads quite easily by selecting the "View" menu and unchecking the "Advertisement".

  • 0

the problem i find with foxit is that the text is often not very clear wheras adobe 9 the text is very clear and the space those setup files is negligable so i would not remove them as they may be needed later and if you delete them and say the updater needs them you would have to reinstall adobe just to get them back and those ads in foxit are annoying(i dunno why foxit added them)adobe used to be slow but now it seems they have learned and made it fast.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.