Wednesday, February 4. 2009Free alternatives to proprietary PDF readers now easy to find I suppose we all have come across that "red button" on websites asking you to download Acrobat Reader to read a PDF document. Even free for download, it still is a proprietary solution and in no way a Free Software tool. Now, my friends at the Free Software Foundation Europe have been busy working on a website to propose alternative readers for all OS platforms: pdfreaders.org. And it seems that there is only one alternative package running on all operating systems: Okular  Another proof that KDE is "The Universal Desktop".Don't forget to use the buttons provided for your websites:  There are other models in the "Graphics" part of the website.Update: if you want to get in touch with the authors of pdfreaders.org, you can drop them a mail with this link. Trackbacks
Trackback specific URI for this entry
No Trackbacks
Comments
Display comments as
(Linear | Threaded)
That's all well and good, but if any non-technical user can figure out how to install Okular in windows I will eat my hat, and all the hats at the local thrift store.
I tried this last night, and first you have to download the installer (no mention of okular), then you have to click through a lot of screens with quite some technical mumbo jumbo (once again, no mention of okular). The package selection has tons of packages, with languages mixed in to apps, and no mention of okular. The only reason I knew what to install was because I run linux anyway so I know okular is usually in KDEgraphics. So Okular as the only cross-platform free PDF reader is nice, but with the current installer, no-one that isn't already a linux user will ever manage to install it on windows.
I tend to agree with Leo, Okular is fantastic but until it provides an easy install process by just clicking one button it won't be as simple.
Adobe Reader is not free, but its free enough for most users not to care. Foxit PDF reader has a free version, and its fantastic however probably not free enough for FSF to advertise it - I guess rightly so.
But Foxit is not free as libre, it is free as beer.
The important is the free software, citing the wikipedia: "Free Software or software libre is software that can be used, studied, and modified without restriction, and which can be copied and redistributed in modified or unmodified form either without restriction...."
I came here to say to very thing Leo said. Where is the Windows and MacOSX download in this page? http://okular.kde.org/download.php
Until then the ports do not exist for the general populace.
I think this is a great idea. It needs to have OS-detection though like Adobes site, that table is much too confusing.
On that site there is few mistakes about free operating systems. Yes, it is easier to place Linux, BSD's and SunOS under one list. But at least you should not say that Operating systems includes the package manager what allows you to install these.
All the operating systems are Linux kernel, OpenBSD kernel, FreeBSD kernel, NetBSD kernel and SunOS kernel. And none of these operating systems include the package manager but they are included on the software system itself. So there should be readed "you can get these trought package manager what is available for your operating system". Because in example, for Linux OS (kernel) there is multiple different package managers, like APT, YUM, Zypper, URPMI, Pacman etc. Just different distributions includes different package manager for in the system. Just needed to say, because the correct information is important and because it can be achieved just by using correct words and terms And the link buttons, they are just great. Looks nice and I like them even more than Adobes red button
I agree with that an average user won't be able to install Okular this way. I cannot put this link on a site where a PDF reader is needed because if the poor user happens to click on Okular on Windows, they won't be able to install a PDF reader.
@Tom.Sandels: AFAIK operating system does not mean only the kernel but also the system programs. Linux is not an operating system but a kernel; Linux and a bunch of programs, typically including a package manager, as part of a distribution make an operating system. So IMO saying that most free operating systems include a package manager is correct.
@all commenters that claim this download/install sugestion is to complicated for average (Windows) users:
When did you install a Windows application the last time? It must have been years ago and your memory must have faded seriously. I never found it easier to get a binary for any operating system (Windows, Linux...) if the software in question was free software (free as "frei" = Free(-dom) in German :p): You just go to the project web page, search on the left side for "download" and voila you get a web page that points you a binary for your desired OS, click on this binary package (or RPM, Deb...), download it, doubleclick on it, say yes to install and that's it. Did you ever try to get a random freebeer, shareware or other Software for Windows? You have to click at least 4 times "dowload me [really really] now!" "premium dowload here!" and whatnot. You have to wade through a lot of advertising and worst of it all during and after installation you have to remove bundled ad-, spy- and (sorry for the s-word but true) shit-ware. Ok Ok. The Acrobat Reader download page is a little bit more friendly to people but still you have to care about software that comes bundled with it and need to keep an eye on Acrobat Reader's internet activities after installation. So please don't declare Windows users as dumb idiots! Quite the contrary many of them will be surprised cause of this FSFE campaing how easy it is to get and install free software on Windows in contrast to everything else. (P.S.: That does not mean that Okular on Windows could not be installed a bit more easier, but Rome wasn't build in a day either and of course people even are offered an alternative alongside a hint for the time beeing).
Yes, I was meaning the Adobe download page which offers the installer exe/rpm/etc. directly, and the installer is user-friendly (and it is user-friendly on Linux as well if the distribution associates the package installer with the package file type). Not all Windows users are idiots but few of them would find out which package contains Okular. And if we rely on the user having a PDF reader (because our site contains PDF's) we have to offer a reliable software that anyone can install.
Also, I don't remember those nasty things when installing e. g. Total Commander (to say a freeware app), and installing free software is normally definitely easy.
Ok. We both surely agree that installing Okular on Windows is a bit advantageous at the moment (in contrast to $Linux-distro where it is very easy), but:
1. pdfreaders.org makes no secret about the fact that Okular on Windows is not that easy to install at the moment. 2. Windows users are offered with two other alternatives. 3. Windows users can read and think: So they very likely will like the concise yet comprehensive overview of existing free PDF readers and thus will take in a few seconds a good choice according to their personal taste. And above all: If you support free software but consider the FSFE website too complicated (maybe because of to many choices) why not taking it as an inspiration and link "Sumatra PDF" as you recommended Windows PDF viewer on your web pages (maybe until Okular is declared stable on Windows and is easier to install on it)? Even in this case the website has achieved something great: Bigger awareness for free alternatives (which are easier and more productive to use for most people as pointed out above, even if not every feature of Acrobat is supported). I don't buy the (often mentioned) mantra that an (IMHO) unecessary complicate to use Acrobat Reader is a must for everyone because of some obscure features you need in 1% of all use cases (which are even supported by libpoppler-based viewer's to a very large extend).
Yea exactly, the comparision should be againist the Adobe page not hypothetical "free Windows software".
I never thought this might end up in such a discussion, but here are a few clarifications:
@Tom.Sandels:If you think there are errors or omissions in the pdfreaders.org site, please report them there, they have a mailing list disucssion@fsfeurope.org, where you can send your reports. @all: this is just the beginning of a new campaign, so not everything is perfect. The goal is to end up with a valid alternative to closed source software for an otherwise freely documented standard format, and this for all platforms.
It is funny that the button says "Get a sree (sic) PDF READER". They used a cursive Long s (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_s) instead of a cursive 'f'. A contrast between the two can be seen in the US Declaration of Independence: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/07/Us_declaration_independence.jpg.
|
Amarok LinksCalendarQuicksearchCategoriesSyndicate This BlogBlog AdministrationWe Listen To... Powered by
|
