Comments on: Smaller, faster, better? Quick C&I changes http://walt.lishost.org/2008/11/smaller-faster-better-quick-ci-changes/ The library voice of the radical middle. Wed, 22 May 2013 20:18:14 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1 By: walt http://walt.lishost.org/2008/11/smaller-faster-better-quick-ci-changes/comment-page-1/#comment-34666 walt Sun, 09 Nov 2008 22:14:13 +0000 http://walt.lishost.org/?p=901#comment-34666 CutePDF, the free version does not. CutePDF Pro might, according to the website–might combine multiple PDFs into a single PDF, that is. I haven’t seen a review that satisfied me this was true; maybe I spent more than I needed to.

(I’d looked at the boxes and websites of several “competitors,” and when I drilled down enough, I found that they really didn’t combine PDFs. Maybe I missed CutePDF.)

On the other hand, I strongly suspect no competitor can compress a PDF file as effectively as Adobe–you’d expect that. And the 40% difference from Microsoft’s tool is pretty astounding.

(Actually, 40% may be low. On the book I’m working on, Word’s PDF output produced a 3.2MB file–there are lots of charts. Acrobat produced a 1.2MB file.)

]]> By: ash966 http://walt.lishost.org/2008/11/smaller-faster-better-quick-ci-changes/comment-page-1/#comment-34665 ash966 Sun, 09 Nov 2008 20:30:18 +0000 http://walt.lishost.org/?p=901#comment-34665 Maybe I am misunderstanding, but doesn’t CutePDF do that:

http://www.cutepdf.com/

We recently had it installed at work, and it’s been very handy.

ASH

]]>