X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["1124" "Fri" "18" "December" "1998" "14:27:00" "+0100" "Hans Aberg" "haberg@MATEMATIK.SU.SE" nil "26" "Re: pointless discussions" "^Date:" nil nil "12" nil nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: from listserv.gmd.de (listserv.gmd.de [192.88.97.1]) by mail.Uni-Mainz.DE (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id OAA10133; Fri, 18 Dec 1998 14:28:22 +0100 (MET) Received: from lsv1.listserv.gmd.de (192.88.97.2) by listserv.gmd.de (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id <8.1F9199F8@listserv.gmd.de>; Fri, 18 Dec 1998 14:28:20 +0100 Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 413709 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Fri, 18 Dec 1998 14:28:16 +0100 Received: from mail0.nada.kth.se (mail0.nada.kth.se [130.237.222.70]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id OAA04252 for ; Fri, 18 Dec 1998 14:28:14 +0100 (MET) Received: from [130.237.37.136] (sl04.modempool.kth.se [130.237.37.24]) by mail0.nada.kth.se (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA28244 for ; Fri, 18 Dec 1998 14:28:11 +0100 (MET) X-Sender: su95-hab@mail.nada.kth.se References: (message from Hans Aberg on Fri, 18 Dec 1998 13:23:13 +0100) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Message-ID: Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project In-Reply-To: <199812181230.MAA23708@nag.co.uk> Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 14:27:00 +0100 From: Hans Aberg Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L Subject: Re: pointless discussions Status: R X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 3199 At 12:30 +0000 1998/12/18, David Carlisle wrote: >[taken off the list, I am sure people are tired of this by now] I find it about as exciting in private conversations as in public conversations. >> (That is, the PDF files created were unusable within Acrobat >> Reader, for some reason I do not know.) > >By all accounts acrobat on a mac is decidedly unstable. >But the fact that a piece of software doesn't work as advertised does >not mean that it makes sense to criticise it on the grounds of expense, >given that it is distributed for free. As far as I know, it was not the problem of the MacOS version of Acrobat, which seemed to work just fine, but the incompatibility between the QuickDraw and PS systems. So if one would accept pdfTeX as a standard, one could as well accept quickdrawTeX as a standard, or the version of PS that HP uses, I mean, if the idea is to sponsor a commercial company. Hans Aberg * Email: Hans Aberg * Home Page: * AMS member listing: