[ale] Still no flames... :-)

[Michael B. Trausch]

aaron wrote:
>  
> ... and that's before the considering the scope of different capabilities 
> between the two formats.  While RTF has it's place as a simple, low overhead, 
> basic document format standard, PDF  provides nearly total document 
> formatting control, which pretty fully justify the added overhead.
> 
> Of course, if computers capable of easily handling the resource demands of PDF 
> weren't readily and affordably available, the scales would lean more toward 
> the advantages of smaller size and lower overhead.
> 

The thing that I like the most about it is that I can create complete
documents with hyperlinked tables of contents, indexes, and the like,
which my peers at my current place of work really like when it comes to
documentation for things that we do.  :-)  And, the fact that
OpenOffice.org is all that I need to generate said hyperlinked table,
it's all the better, and that means no requirement for a license cost.

Also, when you save something in PDF format, it will print right,
anywhere... However I cannot even do that with Microsoft Word from
machine to machine sometimes, because there are times where the document
does not render correctly, even from the same version of Word on my
laptop, to another PC at work.  PDF doesn't give me that issue.

I can't say it's inferior in any way.  Sure, supporting software might
be a bit expensive in terms of disk space, but I can't beat the value.
Microsoft Word (indeed, Microsoft Office) is worse for the size.

	- Mike
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 294 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature