Jaycar PDF sales - what Acrobat Reader version ?

[Albm&ctd]

On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 04:02:51 GMT, "Brian Goldsmith"
<brian.goldsmith@nospam.echo1.com.au> wrote:

Brian Goldsmith.

Seek help.

Al

I don't take sides. It's more fun to insult everyone.
http://kwakakid.cjb.net/insult.html

 

[Bazil]

Albm&ctd wrote:

Well that's where you're farkin wrong again. If they exclude customers
then they lose business. You're not too bright are you.

I don't know about BG, but you, dipstick, definitely came down in the
last shower.

In case you hadn't noticed, these decisions are made by PHB's and
salivating marketing droids. Their only metric on sales / business is
from how much they make. They have no ability / brain space / clue on
the concept of lost sales due to alienating those who choose an
alternative OS / browser / latest file type viewer etc. Wise up.

I don't take sides. It's more fun to insult everyone.

Indeed...

 

[budgie]

On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 04:13:39 GMT, alb_mandctdNOWMD@connexus.net.au (Albm&ctd)
wrote:

On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 04:02:51 GMT, "Brian Goldsmith"
brian.goldsmith@nospam.echo1.com.au> wrote:


Brian Goldsmith.

Seek help.

He's beyond help. His main trouble is that he's a Roddles/Phyllis wannabe.

 

[budgie]

On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 08:09:07 GMT, Bazil <nospam@spamzfree.net> wrote:

Albm&ctd wrote:

Well that's where you're farkin wrong again. If they exclude customers
then they lose business. You're not too bright are you.

I don't know about BG, but you, dipstick, definitely came down in the
last shower.

In case you hadn't noticed, these decisions are made by PHB's and
salivating marketing droids. Their only metric on sales / business is
from how much they make. They have no ability / brain space / clue on
the concept of lost sales due to alienating those who choose an
alternative OS / browser / latest file type viewer etc. Wise up.

In which case one can presume that in the fullness of time - or sooner maybe -
their employer will discover the lost sales and dispense with said salivators.

 

[Albm&ctd]

On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 08:09:07 GMT, Bazil <nospam@spamzfree.net> wrote:

Albm&ctd wrote:

Well that's where you're farkin wrong again. If they exclude customers
then they lose business. You're not too bright are you.

I don't know about BG, but you, dipstick, definitely came down in the
last shower.

I don't know about Bill Gates either. I ride a bike and definately did

not come down in the last shower.
I'll be a dipstick if you admit to being an invertebrate with a soft
unsegmented body enclosed in a shell.

In case you hadn't noticed, these decisions are made by PHB's and
salivating marketing droids. Their only metric on sales / business is
from how much they make. They have no ability / brain space / clue on
the concept of lost sales due to alienating those who choose an
alternative OS / browser / latest file type viewer etc. Wise up.

I go to Jaycar. They don't appear to have the volume of customers to

alieniate anyone. They may appreciate the advice to make their
advertising more widely read with a PDF that is backward compatible to
5.0.xx. The idea when advertising, is to reach as many interested
people as possible unless you can afford to exclude customers.

I don't take sides. It's more fun to insult everyone.

Indeed...

Call it restraint.

Al

I don't take sides. It's more fun to insult everyone.
http://kwakakid.cjb.net/insult.html

 

[Brian Goldsmith]

"Albm&ctd" <alb_mandctdNOWMD@connexus.net.au> wrote

I don't know about BG, but you, dipstick, definitely came down in the
last shower.

I don't know about Bill Gates either. I ride a bike and definately did

not come down in the last shower.


***You can't spell either!!!

I don't take sides. It's more fun to insult everyone.

Indeed...

Call it restraint.

**** The only restraint around here should be on your looney ravings!

Nothing's changed,you're still a wanker.!!!


Brian Goldsmith.

 

[Albm&ctd]

On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 07:04:58 GMT, "Brian Goldsmith"
<brian.goldsmith@nospam.echo1.com.au> wrote:

"Albm&ctd" <alb_mandctdNOWMD@connexus.net.au> wrote


I don't know about BG, but you, dipstick, definitely came down in the
last shower.

I don't know about Bill Gates either. I ride a bike and definately did
not come down in the last shower.


***You can't spell either!!!

lol - but you can't accuse me of cheating.

Must have nearly broke the tweezers pulling yourself over that. Is
emphatically better? I hope I don't get into trouble for picking on an
imbecile.

Al

I don't take sides. It's more fun to insult everyone.
http://kwakakid.cjb.net/insult.html

 

[Albm&ctd]

On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 20:51:29 +0800, budgie <me@privacy.net> wrote:

On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 04:13:39 GMT, alb_mandctdNOWMD@connexus.net.au (Albm&ctd)
wrote:

On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 04:02:51 GMT, "Brian Goldsmith"
brian.goldsmith@nospam.echo1.com.au> wrote:


Brian Goldsmith.

Seek help.

He's beyond help. His main trouble is that he's a Roddles/Phyllis wannabe.

IMHO Phil and Rod provide useful information to create a balance
whereas sad and lonely Brian does not. It appears he has no useful
information at all to contribute. The sad and lonely little person has
just picked on a misplaced vowel in a word I used. I don't think this
adds much to a discussion about Adobe products and their reluctance to
provide a reader for either Win 95 or Linux to accurately view the
latest PDF produced by their software.
I'm more interested in why their later reader will not install on the
earlier version of windows. Is this to do with missing files that the
later reader looks for? If you remove IE from win 98 the later version
of the reader will not install on that version of windows. Version 6
of IE will not install on win 95. I've got both versions of windows 95
and 98 and two flavours of win 95, (95a and 95 OSR2).
On this old 333 cyrix net box, Win 95 is ideal and I back the whole
installation up in Linux for a speedy install when windows fails. Win
XP would be slow as, whereas 95 runs very well.
Many years ago, the upgrade from 95a seemed necessary when a new AMD
350 processor we purchased for another machine would not run at 350
MHz and it's very naughty to run the same copy of windows on more than
one machine, or so the vomit EULA says.
The patch would not install on 95a but later, after the purchase of
the later version, it was simply looking for some files that were not
present in 95a. You can put it on if you copy these files over to the
supposedly obsolete 95a but it is rather disgusting that you run out
and buy a later OS just for a couple of files.
In the original posters case, Acrobat reader 6 won't install and I'm
more interested in why. Could it be looking for some files and if they
are not present, reject the install? Over to you, oh great wise
Budgie.

Al

I don't take sides. It's more fun to insult everyone.
http://kwakakid.cjb.net/insult.html

 

[Brian Goldsmith]

"Albm&ctd" <alb_mandctdNOWMD@connexus.net.au> wrote

I don't think this
adds much to a discussion about Adobe products and their reluctance to
provide a reader for either Win 95 or Linux to accurately view the
latest PDF produced by their software.
I'm more interested in why their later reader will not install on the
earlier version of windows. Is this to do with missing files that the
later reader looks for? If you remove IE from win 98 the later version
of the reader will not install on that version of windows. Version 6
of IE will not install on win 95. I've got both versions of windows 95
and 98 and two flavours of win 95, (95a and 95 OSR2).
On this old 333 cyrix net box, Win 95 is ideal and I back the whole
installation up in Linux for a speedy install when windows fails. Win
XP would be slow as, whereas 95 runs very well.
Many years ago, the upgrade from 95a seemed necessary when a new AMD
350 processor we purchased for another machine would not run at 350
MHz and it's very naughty to run the same copy of windows on more than
one machine, or so the vomit EULA says.
The patch would not install on 95a but later, after the purchase of
the later version, it was simply looking for some files that were not
present in 95a. You can put it on if you copy these files over to the
supposedly obsolete 95a but it is rather disgusting that you run out
and buy a later OS just for a couple of files.
In the original posters case, Acrobat reader 6 won't install and I'm
more interested in why. Could it be looking for some files and if they
are not present, reject the install? Over to you, oh great wise
Budgie.

***** Dead horse,flog flog,wank wank.!!!

Brian Goldsmith

 

[Franc Zabkar]

On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 20:08:11 GMT, alb_mandctdNOWMD@connexus.net.au
(Albm&ctd) put finger to keyboard and composed:

I'm more interested in why their later reader will not install on the
earlier version of windows. Is this to do with missing files that the
later reader looks for?

The answer may be as simple as a temporary edit of the registry. For
example, the latest versions of Zone Alarm (firewall + antivirus
bundle) refuse to install if they detect PC-cillin. As it turns out,
ZA looks in the registry for signs of "incompatible" AV programs. I
solved my problem without uninstalling PC-cillin by locating this
registry key (Win98SE) ...

HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\TrendMicro

.... and temporarily renaming it to "TendMicro". ZA then installed
without complaint. To avoid potential conflicts, I took the precaution
of disabling ZA's "Antivirus Monitoring", and I have not installed
PC-cillin's firewall.

Perhaps you could make Acrobat Reader's installer happy by temporarily
modifying the following registry key:

HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion

Temporarily change the ProductId, ProductKey, ProductName,
ProductType, Version, and VersionNumber values to those reported by
Windows 98se. I suggest you then install Acrobat Reader without first
rebooting.

If the installer complains about a missing file, try creating a zero
length file of the same name at the DOS prompt as follows:

rem > filename.ext

If you remove IE from win 98 the later version
of the reader will not install on that version of windows. Version 6
of IE will not install on win 95. I've got both versions of windows 95
and 98 and two flavours of win 95, (95a and 95 OSR2).
On this old 333 cyrix net box,...

I was running the same combination until I succumbed to the endless
nagging of software vendors and reluctantly switched to Windows 98se.
I'm happy now, though.

... Win 95 is ideal and I back the whole
installation up in Linux for a speedy install when windows fails. Win
XP would be slow as, whereas 95 runs very well.

- Franc Zabkar
--
Please remove one 's' from my address when replying by email.

 

[budgie]

On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 20:08:11 GMT, alb_mandctdNOWMD@connexus.net.au (Albm&ctd)
wrote:

On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 20:51:29 +0800, budgie <me@privacy.net> wrote:

On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 04:13:39 GMT, alb_mandctdNOWMD@connexus.net.au (Albm&ctd)
wrote:

On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 04:02:51 GMT, "Brian Goldsmith"
brian.goldsmith@nospam.echo1.com.au> wrote:


Brian Goldsmith.

Seek help.

He's beyond help. His main trouble is that he's a Roddles/Phyllis wannabe.

IMHO Phil and Rod provide useful information to create a balance

Rod, yes. Phyllis - doubtful, but she's been in my killfile for some good time
now, ever since her permanent PMS became overpowering. Regrettably I see her
spewings in ppl's follow-ups.

It's rare that Roddles starts a separate thread just to abuse someone who
disagrees with him.

(snip)

The patch would not install on 95a but later, after the purchase of
the later version, it was simply looking for some files that were not
present in 95a. You can put it on if you copy these files over to the
supposedly obsolete 95a but it is rather disgusting that you run out
and buy a later OS just for a couple of files.
In the original posters case, Acrobat reader 6 won't install and I'm
more interested in why. Could it be looking for some files and if they
are not present, reject the install? Over to you, oh great wise
Budgie.

Don't get too carried away. I've never used 95, migrated from WFWG straight to
98SE where I currently reside, so I can't add anything there.

I installed AR6 a few months back. It must have been three hours before I
rooted it out and reinsalled AR5. Faster loading, less hassles. Occasionally I
get that message "this doc may contain stuff that your out-of-date version may
not render correctly". Haven't seen any problems yet, so if they exist they are
subtle.