Submit Hint Search The Forums LinksStatsPollsHeadlinesRSS
14,000 hints and counting!

Preview app and use with PDF form files Apps
I had a problem viewing and printing a PDF file generated by an online service. The file consisted of a filled-in form. The form was there on screen, but the data that makes the form useful was invisible -- until I opened the file in Adobe Acrobat Reader instead of the Preview window it opened in automatically. In AAR, the file looked and printed fine.

Preview works fine with all other PDF files I've viewed and printed, so I suspect the problem here has to do with the service sending a form and then data to fill in the form. Hopefully Apple will fix what appears to be a bug in Preview, but until then, you can use the workaround of opening the file in AAR.
  • Currently 3.00 / 5
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  (2 votes cast)

Preview app and use with PDF form files | 4 comments | Create New Account
Click here to return to the 'Preview app and use with PDF form files' hint
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
DisplayPDF does not support Forms (and lots of other stuff)
Authored by: frankie1969 on Feb 18, '03 11:08:05AM
This is one of my Top X Complaints About OS X

DisplayPDF is not a complete implementation of PDF. It supports most of PDF 1.2, parts of PDF 1.3, and none of PDF 1.4.

[ Reply to This | # ]
DisplayPDF does not support Forms (and lots of other stuff)
Authored by: prodok on Feb 18, '03 06:09:27PM

And in addition to this, the Apple display implementation does not support any of the overlaying planes (Annotations, Form fields, links). This is only supported by Acrobat (Reader).

[ Reply to This | # ]
Apple PDF
Authored by: tomem on Feb 18, '03 05:16:09PM

This is a problem for me, too. It would be nice if we got full PDF
functionality, but Apple already has something of a tiff going with Adobe
over its adoption of PDF without licensing any Adobe software (there is
still no OS X version of Distiller). Apple also has to worry about third
party developers who provide image compression for PDF files. My pet
peeve is that we cannot do jpeg(2000) compression of images in those
files, so they are larger than necessary. However, there is a very nice
implementation of 3rd party PDF processing in the 10.2.4 print dialog
(activate by creating ~/Library/PDF Services/).

What we really need, though, is a minimal PDF editing and layout
program from Adobe or someone, analogous to Photoshop Elements, but
more capable than Acrobat, which hardlly does enough to justify its high
cost. Perhaps Apple's much rumored Word-Killer will do this job?

Crofton, MD

[ Reply to This | # ]
Apple PDF
Authored by: prodok on Feb 18, '03 06:19:24PM

Actually, the PDF specification have been published, and you are free to create your own PDF viewer. There are a few things concerning Transparency which are apparently patented by Adobe, but besides this, you could go on. The problem is, however, that PDF is a pretty complex format, and creating a viewer is a major project.

It is some kind of a pain that there is no Distiller for OSX, but I am confident that with the next major release of Acrobat, there will be a Distiller. So far, it has always been with Adobe products that with the "next major release", OSX capability was introduced. The bad thing with Acrobat is that the development cycles for Acrobat and for OSX happen to be pretty badly out of synch.

Another thing to be aware of. Acrobat is NOT a tool for editing the PDF "base plane". For this, you go to the source document and recreate the PDF, or you use some specialized plug-ins or applications, such as PitStop by Enfocus or Solico by OneVision. Acrobat is used -- as an editing tool -- for the overlaying planes (links, annotations, forms, etc.). So, you use Acrobat to add value to your documents. On these levels, you can create amazing stuff, particularly when you start using the built-in Acrobat JavaScript programming language. Considering this, Acrobat is actually quite a cheap tool.

Max Wyss.

[ Reply to This | # ]