No favorite files added yet
2.0.3 (Nov 10, 2000)
The way Be is designed, you are required to boot from a floppy (bad news). However, you can run any other OS as a guest OS (limiting factors are RAM and hard drive space). 95, 98, SE, ME, 2K (in multiple flavors), NT 4, even DOS (if that floats your boat) along with darn near every Linux (or UNIX) distro on the planet.
2.0.3 (Jun 3, 2006 - 11:14 AM)
XPS is also utterly royalty-free. It's designed as cross-platform from the beginning. And even Adobe can use it without having to worry about being sued.
2.0.3 (Jun 3, 2006 - 11:06 AM)
Adobe is charging *only Microsoft*, not Windows users as a class or group. Notice that OpenOffice (which is also available for Windows) still includes Save as PDF (OpenOffice for Windows is *free*, by the by). Tax preparation software for the *past three years* has also included Save as PDF (and not just the big boys such as TurboTax and TaxCut; TaxAct and TaxSlayer, both of which are often given away, support Save as PDF). There are *plenty* of no-cost PDF conversion utilities out there (especially for Windows); you can do a search for such right on FileForum and come up with several pages of them. And may I point out that most are, in fact, free? So it seems that Adobe is simply discriminating against Microsoft as a company.
2.0.3 (Jun 3, 2006 - 10:58 AM)
That isn't the issue. Adobe's Reader software isn't even CLOSE to being the issue. The issue is conversion of Office file formats to PDF. Microsoft wanted to include a converter; Adobe wants Microsoft to charge for it (with some or all of that fee going to Adobe). *Never mind* that there are all sorts of free PDF conversion utilities out there (Adobe has taken no action against these products, which presumably violate one of more patents held by Adobe) and never mind that, with the exception of Corel WordPerfect Office, other productivity suites (including the free OpenOffice) include PDF as a document format option. You are basically giving Adobe a free pass for committing the same sort of *foul* that would be inexcusable if Microsoft were to do so. And here's the utterly laughable part: Microsoft, the victim in this case, is actually taking the high road and giving the competition (including Adobe) royalty-free access to Microsoft's Office Open XML formats!
Is Adobe *that* unconcerned over pissing off their customers?
2.0.3 (Jun 3, 2006 - 10:45 AM)
Until Adobe comments, I see their position as anti-open. While OpenOffice (all platforms, including Windows) can export to PDF (oh, by the by, OpenOffice is free for non-profits, individuals, and other non-business users), and OS X has been able to do so for years, Microsoft Office for Windows is forced to *charge* for it? This is *despite* Microsoft Office being the most expensive (as well as being the most popular) productivity suite. Does Adobe sell *that* many copies of Acrobat Professional for Windows?
Contrast this with Microsoft's own behavior; not only has it subitted the Office Open XML formats to ECMA, but it has actually given *everybody* (including both Corel and Adobe), royalty-free usage of said formats.
This is the *same* Adobe that has championed the adoption of PDF as a document intrchange standard for darn near everything (for the last three years, I've used three different brands of tax-prep software; they *all* support exporting of the completed product to PDF). Is it one rule for everybody else, and another rule for Microsoft?
As far as Microsoft's conduct, they are actually taking the high road here, by allowing no-quibble usage of their own formats (even by Adobe). The ball is in Adobe's court.
2.0.3 (Nov 8, 2005 - 1:44 PM)
I'm hoping that the V3C will be available in the color choices that the original RAZR is (including Sith Black, of course)m as my carrier is CDMA-based Verizon Wireless, which precludes using a phone such as the RAZR (until now).