Kent replied to sf:

>> I would like PBS cooking shows a lot better if I had a data base of
>> recipes to search instead of having to buy an entire book just to find
>> the one I want. Food Network took away the need to sit with pencil in
>> hand taking notes while watching a tv cooking show.
>>
> The Jacques Pepin and Christopher Kimball shows have online printable
> recipes for the current season. You can print them before you watch the
> programs.

Same thing for Hubert Keller, Eric Ripert, and Rick Bayless.

Bob

In article >,
"Bob Terwilliger" > wrote:

> Kent replied to sf:
>
> >> I would like PBS cooking shows a lot better if I had a data base of
> >> recipes to search instead of having to buy an entire book just to find
> >> the one I want. Food Network took away the need to sit with pencil in
> >> hand taking notes while watching a tv cooking show.
> >>
> > The Jacques Pepin and Christopher Kimball shows have online printable
> > recipes for the current season. You can print them before you watch the
> > programs.
>
> Same thing for Hubert Keller, Eric Ripert, and Rick Bayless.
>
> Bob

Hmmm...

I record Alton Brown and Rick Bayless shows on a DVD-R. No need keep a
pencil and paper on hand. I use a small portable DVD player in the
kitchen as a supplement to the printed online recipes. Print and Player
seems to complement each other.

Enjoy Life... Dan

--
Garden in Zone 5 South East Michigan.

On Tue, 5 Jan 2010 01:59:45 -0800, "Bob Terwilliger"
> wrote:

>Kent replied to sf:
>
>>> I would like PBS cooking shows a lot better if I had a data base of
>>> recipes to search instead of having to buy an entire book just to find
>>> the one I want. Food Network took away the need to sit with pencil in
>>> hand taking notes while watching a tv cooking show.
>>>
>> The Jacques Pepin and Christopher Kimball shows have online printable
>> recipes for the current season. You can print them before you watch the
>> programs.
>
>Same thing for Hubert Keller, Eric Ripert, and Rick Bayless.
>
I looked up Jacques Pepin. It's a 49 recipe pdf. No thanks.


--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.

sf wrote:

>>>> I would like PBS cooking shows a lot better if I had a data base of
>>>> recipes to search instead of having to buy an entire book just to find
>>>> the one I want. Food Network took away the need to sit with pencil in
>>>> hand taking notes while watching a tv cooking show.
>>>>
>>> The Jacques Pepin and Christopher Kimball shows have online printable
>>> recipes for the current season. You can print them before you watch the
>>> programs.
>>
>> Same thing for Hubert Keller, Eric Ripert, and Rick Bayless.
>>
> I looked up Jacques Pepin. It's a 49 recipe pdf. No thanks.

I looked at Pepin's KQED site for "Fast Food My Way" and saw a bunch of
quick recipes all saved as one large text file. None of them struck my
fancy, but I didn't summarily dismiss them the way you did the pdf.

I'm not sure what site you were viewing, but I don't see anything outrageous
about the idea of a 49-recipe pdf. What is your objection to it? Were they
recipes you already had?

Bob

"Bob Terwilliger" > wrote in message
...
> sf wrote:
>
>>>>> I would like PBS cooking shows a lot better if I had a data base of
>>>>> recipes to search instead of having to buy an entire book just to find
>>>>> the one I want. Food Network took away the need to sit with pencil in
>>>>> hand taking notes while watching a tv cooking show.
>>>>>
>>>> The Jacques Pepin and Christopher Kimball shows have online printable
>>>> recipes for the current season. You can print them before you watch the
>>>> programs.
>>>
>>> Same thing for Hubert Keller, Eric Ripert, and Rick Bayless.
>>>
>> I looked up Jacques Pepin. It's a 49 recipe pdf. No thanks.
>
> I looked at Pepin's KQED site for "Fast Food My Way" and saw a bunch of
> quick recipes all saved as one large text file. None of them struck my
> fancy, but I didn't summarily dismiss them the way you did the pdf.
>
> I'm not sure what site you were viewing, but I don't see anything
> outrageous
> about the idea of a 49-recipe pdf. What is your objection to it? Were they
> recipes you already had?
>
> Bob
>
I've always been able to print individual recipes. It appears like you still
can: http://www.kqed.org/w/morefastfoodmyway/episodes.html

Kent

Kent wrote:

>>> I looked up Jacques Pepin. It's a 49 recipe pdf. No thanks.
>>
>> I looked at Pepin's KQED site for "Fast Food My Way" and saw a bunch of
>> quick recipes all saved as one large text file. None of them struck my
>> fancy, but I didn't summarily dismiss them the way you did the pdf.
>>
>> I'm not sure what site you were viewing, but I don't see anything
>> outrageous about the idea of a 49-recipe pdf. What is your objection to
>> it? Were they recipes you already had?
>>
> I've always been able to print individual recipes. It appears like you
> still can: http://www.kqed.org/w/morefastfoodmyway/episodes.html

Yes, that's right. However, if I wanted to print individual recipes I'd just
copy the big text file (which is under the "printer friendly" link) and then
paste into individual text files rather than clicking on link after link.
Just a matter of personal preference.

Even so, I don't think sf was referring to "Fast Food My Way" in mentioning
the 49-recipe pdf; I saw nothing like that on the web site.

Bob

On Wed, 6 Jan 2010 00:12:24 -0800, "Bob Terwilliger"
> wrote:

>I'm not sure what site you were viewing, but I don't see anything outrageous
>about the idea of a 49-recipe pdf. What is your objection to it? Were they
>recipes you already had?

I already said I prefer the searchable data base of Food Network and I
like being able to go to an individual show I'm watching to find those
recipes without sifting through a bunch of others first.

--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.

On Wed, 6 Jan 2010 01:55:45 -0800, "Kent" > wrote:

>
>"Bob Terwilliger" > wrote in message
.. .
>> sf wrote:
>>
>>>>>> I would like PBS cooking shows a lot better if I had a data base of
>>>>>> recipes to search instead of having to buy an entire book just to find
>>>>>> the one I want. Food Network took away the need to sit with pencil in
>>>>>> hand taking notes while watching a tv cooking show.
>>>>>>
>>>>> The Jacques Pepin and Christopher Kimball shows have online printable
>>>>> recipes for the current season. You can print them before you watch the
>>>>> programs.
>>>>
>>>> Same thing for Hubert Keller, Eric Ripert, and Rick Bayless.
>>>>
>>> I looked up Jacques Pepin. It's a 49 recipe pdf. No thanks.
>>
>> I looked at Pepin's KQED site for "Fast Food My Way" and saw a bunch of
>> quick recipes all saved as one large text file. None of them struck my
>> fancy, but I didn't summarily dismiss them the way you did the pdf.
>>
>> I'm not sure what site you were viewing, but I don't see anything
>> outrageous
>> about the idea of a 49-recipe pdf. What is your objection to it? Were they
>> recipes you already had?
>>
>> Bob
>>
>I've always been able to print individual recipes. It appears like you still
>can: http://www.kqed.org/w/morefastfoodmyway/episodes.html
>

This one was called "The Complete Pepin". I dislike pdfs.

--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.

In article >,
"Bob Terwilliger" > wrote:

> sf wrote:

> > I looked up Jacques Pepin. It's a 49 recipe pdf. No thanks.
>
> I looked at Pepin's KQED site for "Fast Food My Way" and saw a bunch of
> quick recipes all saved as one large text file. None of them struck my
> fancy, but I didn't summarily dismiss them the way you did the pdf.
>
> I'm not sure what site you were viewing, but I don't see anything outrageous
> about the idea of a 49-recipe pdf. What is your objection to it? Were they
> recipes you already had?

And if you don't want 49, I don't think it's rocket science to extract
just the ones you want, and print or file those.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

On Wed, 06 Jan 2010 10:43:07 -0800, Dan Abel > wrote:

>And if you don't want 49, I don't think it's rocket science to extract
>just the ones you want, and print or file those.

Everyday Food on PBS has a less objectionable (for me) recipe index.
http://www.pbs.org/everydayfood/recipes/ They only need to tweak it
to have a "printer friendly" button although Copy > Paste Special >
unformatted text works for me.

--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.

In article >,
sf > wrote:

> On Wed, 6 Jan 2010 00:12:24 -0800, "Bob Terwilliger"
> > wrote:
>
> >I'm not sure what site you were viewing, but I don't see anything outrageous
> >about the idea of a 49-recipe pdf. What is your objection to it? Were they
> >recipes you already had?
>
> I already said I prefer the searchable data base of Food Network

I like the new (in the last year or so) FN web site, other than the fact
that it is clumsy, awkward, buggy and *p a i n f u l l y s l o w*.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

On Wed, 06 Jan 2010 12:16:26 -0800, Dan Abel > wrote:

>I like the new (in the last year or so) FN web site, other than the fact
>that it is clumsy, awkward, buggy and *p a i n f u l l y s l o w*.

I have cable access and FF with noscripts and Ad Blocker installed.
It's fast enough for my purposes.

--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.

On Wed, 06 Jan 2010 10:43:07 -0800, Dan Abel wrote:

> In article >,
> "Bob Terwilliger" > wrote:
>
>> sf wrote:
>
>>> I looked up Jacques Pepin. It's a 49 recipe pdf. No thanks.
>>
>> I looked at Pepin's KQED site for "Fast Food My Way" and saw a bunch of
>> quick recipes all saved as one large text file. None of them struck my
>> fancy, but I didn't summarily dismiss them the way you did the pdf.
>>
>> I'm not sure what site you were viewing, but I don't see anything outrageous
>> about the idea of a 49-recipe pdf. What is your objection to it? Were they
>> recipes you already had?
>
> And if you don't want 49, I don't think it's rocket science to extract
> just the ones you want, and print or file those.

the .pdfs i've seen are resistant to cut and paste. do you have a good
method?

your pal,
blake

blake murphy wrote:
> On Wed, 06 Jan 2010 10:43:07 -0800, Dan Abel wrote:
>
>> In article >,
>> "Bob Terwilliger" > wrote:
>>
>>> sf wrote:
>>>> I looked up Jacques Pepin. It's a 49 recipe pdf. No thanks.
>>> I looked at Pepin's KQED site for "Fast Food My Way" and saw a bunch of
>>> quick recipes all saved as one large text file. None of them struck my
>>> fancy, but I didn't summarily dismiss them the way you did the pdf.
>>>
>>> I'm not sure what site you were viewing, but I don't see anything outrageous
>>> about the idea of a 49-recipe pdf. What is your objection to it? Were they
>>> recipes you already had?
>> And if you don't want 49, I don't think it's rocket science to extract
>> just the ones you want, and print or file those.
>
> the .pdfs i've seen are resistant to cut and paste. do you have a good
> method?
>
> your pal,
> blake

If it's this:

http://www.kqed.org/w/jpfastfood/recipes.html

it is not a .pdf. You can highlight text and copy/paste.

I have had luck *copying* and pasting from a .pdf.

-Tracy

On Jan 7, 12:48*pm, blake murphy > wrote:
> On Wed, 06 Jan 2010 10:43:07 -0800, Dan Abel wrote:
> > In article >,
> > *"Bob Terwilliger" > wrote:
>
> >> sf wrote:
>
> >>> I looked up Jacques Pepin. *It's a 49 recipe pdf. *No thanks.
>
> >> I looked at Pepin's KQED site for "Fast Food My Way" and saw a bunch of
> >> quick recipes all saved as one large text file. None of them struck my
> >> fancy, but I didn't summarily dismiss them the way you did the pdf.
>
> >> I'm not sure what site you were viewing, but I don't see anything outrageous
> >> about the idea of a 49-recipe pdf. What is your objection to it? Were they
> >> recipes you already had?
>
> > And if you don't want 49, I don't think it's rocket science to extract
> > just the ones you want, and print or file those.
>
> the .pdfs i've seen are resistant to cut and paste. *do you have a good
> method?

I know! I hate that! I got a free pdf to txt or rtf converter.

John Kuthe...

In article >,
blake murphy > wrote:

> On Wed, 06 Jan 2010 10:43:07 -0800, Dan Abel wrote:

> >> sf wrote:
> >
> >>> I looked up Jacques Pepin. It's a 49 recipe pdf. No thanks.

> > And if you don't want 49, I don't think it's rocket science to extract
> > just the ones you want, and print or file those.
>
> the .pdfs i've seen are resistant to cut and paste. do you have a good
> method?

Well, I *thought* I did. I use a Mac. pdf files open with an Apple
application. In the FILE menu, there is a GRAB command, with a
SELECTION option. Grab what you want, and it opens in a little window.
You can then do a standard COPY, and then PASTE it where you want. But
it's a graphic, not text. Still, you can save it or print it.

So, no Acrobat Reader on this machine. Went in the living room to the
Mac there. Opened up Acrobat Reader v5.0. No menu item. Looked
harder. The tool bar has a Text tool. I could copy and paste text with
it. There's also another tool that works like the GRAB.

Went back to this machine. I'll be darned! A tool bar with both a text
tool and the other!

So, it's not perfect. The text doesn't preserve the formatting, and the
graphics doesn't let you edit the text.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

On Thu, 7 Jan 2010 15:27:18 -0800 (PST), John Kuthe wrote:

> On Jan 7, 12:48*pm, blake murphy > wrote:
>> On Wed, 06 Jan 2010 10:43:07 -0800, Dan Abel wrote:
>>> In article >,
>>> *"Bob Terwilliger" > wrote:
>>
>>>> sf wrote:
>>
>>>>> I looked up Jacques Pepin. *It's a 49 recipe pdf. *No thanks.
>>
>>>> I looked at Pepin's KQED site for "Fast Food My Way" and saw a bunch of
>>>> quick recipes all saved as one large text file. None of them struck my
>>>> fancy, but I didn't summarily dismiss them the way you did the pdf.
>>
>>>> I'm not sure what site you were viewing, but I don't see anything outrageous
>>>> about the idea of a 49-recipe pdf. What is your objection to it? Were they
>>>> recipes you already had?
>>
>>> And if you don't want 49, I don't think it's rocket science to extract
>>> just the ones you want, and print or file those.
>>
>> the .pdfs i've seen are resistant to cut and paste. *do you have a good
>> method?
>
> I know! I hate that! I got a free pdf to txt or rtf converter.
>
> John Kuthe...

i'll have to look into this.

your pal,
blake

On Thu, 07 Jan 2010 14:01:02 -0500, Tracy wrote:

> blake murphy wrote:
>> On Wed, 06 Jan 2010 10:43:07 -0800, Dan Abel wrote:
>>
>>> In article >,
>>> "Bob Terwilliger" > wrote:
>>>
>>>> sf wrote:
>>>>> I looked up Jacques Pepin. It's a 49 recipe pdf. No thanks.
>>>> I looked at Pepin's KQED site for "Fast Food My Way" and saw a bunch of
>>>> quick recipes all saved as one large text file. None of them struck my
>>>> fancy, but I didn't summarily dismiss them the way you did the pdf.
>>>>
>>>> I'm not sure what site you were viewing, but I don't see anything outrageous
>>>> about the idea of a 49-recipe pdf. What is your objection to it? Were they
>>>> recipes you already had?
>>> And if you don't want 49, I don't think it's rocket science to extract
>>> just the ones you want, and print or file those.
>>
>> the .pdfs i've seen are resistant to cut and paste. do you have a good
>> method?
>>
>> your pal,
>> blake
>
>
> I have had luck *copying* and pasting from a .pdf.
>
> -Tracy

i'm not sure what you mean by this. typically i'll want to save a
paragraph or to from some .pdf found on the web, but damned if i've figured
out how. and i'm pretty persistent when it comes to trying to do stuff
like this. but it could by that acrobat has an easy method to do this, and
i've been stupid, but a normal highlighting to save doesn't work for me.

your pal,
blake

On Thu, 07 Jan 2010 19:13:42 -0800, Dan Abel wrote:

> In article >,
> blake murphy > wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 06 Jan 2010 10:43:07 -0800, Dan Abel wrote:
>
>>>> sf wrote:
>>>
>>>>> I looked up Jacques Pepin. It's a 49 recipe pdf. No thanks.
>
>>> And if you don't want 49, I don't think it's rocket science to extract
>>> just the ones you want, and print or file those.
>>
>> the .pdfs i've seen are resistant to cut and paste. do you have a good
>> method?
>
> Well, I *thought* I did. I use a Mac. pdf files open with an Apple
> application. In the FILE menu, there is a GRAB command, with a
> SELECTION option. Grab what you want, and it opens in a little window.
> You can then do a standard COPY, and then PASTE it where you want. But
> it's a graphic, not text. Still, you can save it or print it.
>
> So, no Acrobat Reader on this machine. Went in the living room to the
> Mac there. Opened up Acrobat Reader v5.0. No menu item. Looked
> harder. The tool bar has a Text tool. I could copy and paste text with
> it. There's also another tool that works like the GRAB.
>
> Went back to this machine. I'll be darned! A tool bar with both a text
> tool and the other!
>
> So, it's not perfect. The text doesn't preserve the formatting, and the
> graphics doesn't let you edit the text.

o.k. i'll take another look at the tools available in acrobat next time.

your pal,
blake

blake murphy wrote:
> On Thu, 07 Jan 2010 14:01:02 -0500, Tracy wrote:
>
>> blake murphy wrote:
>>> On Wed, 06 Jan 2010 10:43:07 -0800, Dan Abel wrote:
>>>
>>>> In article >,
>>>> "Bob Terwilliger" > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> sf wrote:
>>>>>> I looked up Jacques Pepin. It's a 49 recipe pdf. No thanks.
>>>>> I looked at Pepin's KQED site for "Fast Food My Way" and saw a bunch of
>>>>> quick recipes all saved as one large text file. None of them struck my
>>>>> fancy, but I didn't summarily dismiss them the way you did the pdf.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm not sure what site you were viewing, but I don't see anything outrageous
>>>>> about the idea of a 49-recipe pdf. What is your objection to it? Were they
>>>>> recipes you already had?
>>>> And if you don't want 49, I don't think it's rocket science to extract
>>>> just the ones you want, and print or file those.
>>> the .pdfs i've seen are resistant to cut and paste. do you have a good
>>> method?
>>>
>>> your pal,
>>> blake
>>
>> I have had luck *copying* and pasting from a .pdf.
>>
>> -Tracy
>
> i'm not sure what you mean by this. typically i'll want to save a
> paragraph or to from some .pdf found on the web, but damned if i've figured
> out how. and i'm pretty persistent when it comes to trying to do stuff
> like this. but it could by that acrobat has an easy method to do this, and
> i've been stupid, but a normal highlighting to save doesn't work for me.
>
> your pal,
> blake

Ok. I will admit to copying and pasting from a regular 'ole .pdf
saved on my machine. For the life of me, I can't think of a website
with .pdfs to try.

There is tool in Adobe Reader called "select" which is how I was
able to copy and paste. I am using version 9.

-Tracy
(not a computer expert by any means!)

blake murphy wrote:

> On Thu, 07 Jan 2010 19:13:42 -0800, Dan Abel wrote:
>
>> In article >,
>> blake murphy > wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 06 Jan 2010 10:43:07 -0800, Dan Abel wrote:
>>
>>>>> sf wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> I looked up Jacques Pepin. It's a 49 recipe pdf. No thanks.
>>
>>>> And if you don't want 49, I don't think it's rocket science to
>>>> extract just the ones you want, and print or file those.
>>>
>>> the .pdfs i've seen are resistant to cut and paste. do you have a
>>> good method?
>>
>> Well, I *thought* I did. I use a Mac. pdf files open with an Apple
>> application. In the FILE menu, there is a GRAB command, with a
>> SELECTION option. Grab what you want, and it opens in a little
>> window. You can then do a standard COPY, and then PASTE it where you
>> want. But it's a graphic, not text. Still, you can save it or
>> print it.
>>
>> So, no Acrobat Reader on this machine. Went in the living room to
>> the Mac there. Opened up Acrobat Reader v5.0. No menu item. Looked
>> harder. The tool bar has a Text tool. I could copy and paste text
>> with it. There's also another tool that works like the GRAB.
>>
>> Went back to this machine. I'll be darned! A tool bar with both a
>> text tool and the other!
>>
>> So, it's not perfect. The text doesn't preserve the formatting, and
>> the graphics doesn't let you edit the text.
>
> o.k. i'll take another look at the tools available in acrobat next
> time.


It's pretty "bare bones" but it's better than nothing...


--
Best
Greg

On Thu, 07 Jan 2010 19:13:42 -0800, Dan Abel > wrote:

>In article >,
> blake murphy > wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 06 Jan 2010 10:43:07 -0800, Dan Abel wrote:
>
>> >> sf wrote:
>> >
>> >>> I looked up Jacques Pepin. It's a 49 recipe pdf. No thanks.
>
>> > And if you don't want 49, I don't think it's rocket science to extract
>> > just the ones you want, and print or file those.
>>
>> the .pdfs i've seen are resistant to cut and paste. do you have a good
>> method?
>
>Well, I *thought* I did. I use a Mac. pdf files open with an Apple
>application. In the FILE menu, there is a GRAB command, with a
>SELECTION option. Grab what you want, and it opens in a little window.
>You can then do a standard COPY, and then PASTE it where you want. But
>it's a graphic, not text. Still, you can save it or print it.
>
>So, no Acrobat Reader on this machine. Went in the living room to the
>Mac there. Opened up Acrobat Reader v5.0. No menu item. Looked
>harder. The tool bar has a Text tool. I could copy and paste text with
>it. There's also another tool that works like the GRAB.
>
>Went back to this machine. I'll be darned! A tool bar with both a text
>tool and the other!
>
>So, it's not perfect. The text doesn't preserve the formatting, and the
>graphics doesn't let you edit the text.

It's called creating outlines. If something is put together in
Illustrator with 10 different fonts and sent to a commercial printer
they won't be able to do the job unless they have all the fonts
installed. When you make a PDF with Illustrator you have an option to
let it be edited with illustrator or not. But you won't be able to
edit unless you have the font installed. There's also legal issues
with sharing fonts. A printer would much rather have outlines than be
troubled with installing a bunch of new fonts they will only use for
one job. I'm a few years out of the loop but IIRC back then even a
fine machine started choking after 500 or so fonts were installed.

Lou

On Fri, 8 Jan 2010 14:44:36 -0600, Gregory Morrow wrote:

> blake murphy wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 07 Jan 2010 19:13:42 -0800, Dan Abel wrote:
>>
>>> In article >,
>>> blake murphy > wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Wed, 06 Jan 2010 10:43:07 -0800, Dan Abel wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> sf wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> I looked up Jacques Pepin. It's a 49 recipe pdf. No thanks.
>>>
>>>>> And if you don't want 49, I don't think it's rocket science to
>>>>> extract just the ones you want, and print or file those.
>>>>
>>>> the .pdfs i've seen are resistant to cut and paste. do you have a
>>>> good method?
>>>
>>> Well, I *thought* I did. I use a Mac. pdf files open with an Apple
>>> application. In the FILE menu, there is a GRAB command, with a
>>> SELECTION option. Grab what you want, and it opens in a little
>>> window. You can then do a standard COPY, and then PASTE it where you
>>> want. But it's a graphic, not text. Still, you can save it or
>>> print it.
>>>
>>> So, no Acrobat Reader on this machine. Went in the living room to
>>> the Mac there. Opened up Acrobat Reader v5.0. No menu item. Looked
>>> harder. The tool bar has a Text tool. I could copy and paste text
>>> with it. There's also another tool that works like the GRAB.
>>>
>>> Went back to this machine. I'll be darned! A tool bar with both a
>>> text tool and the other!
>>>
>>> So, it's not perfect. The text doesn't preserve the formatting, and
>>> the graphics doesn't let you edit the text.
>>
>> o.k. i'll take another look at the tools available in acrobat next
>> time.
>
> It's pretty "bare bones" but it's better than nothing...

my mistake. i have adobe, updated now to 8.3.1. right now i'm not sure
what is used when i encounter a .pdf on the web.

your pal,
blake

In article >,
blake murphy > wrote:


> my mistake. i have adobe, updated now to 8.3.1. right now i'm not sure
> what is used when i encounter a .pdf on the web.

So I checked it out, on my machine. I use Firefox, and the default is
Preview. Looks like it would be trivial to change it to anything else I
wanted. Firefox doesn't actually open pdfs, it just downloads them and
then opens them in the specified application. Preview is working OK for
me.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

On Sat, 09 Jan 2010 13:21:21 -0800, Dan Abel wrote:

> In article >,
> blake murphy > wrote:
>
>> my mistake. i have adobe, updated now to 8.3.1. right now i'm not sure
>> what is used when i encounter a .pdf on the web.
>
> So I checked it out, on my machine. I use Firefox, and the default is
> Preview. Looks like it would be trivial to change it to anything else I
> wanted. Firefox doesn't actually open pdfs, it just downloads them and
> then opens them in the specified application. Preview is working OK for
> me.

o.k., that will be another thing to dick around with in my idle moments.

your pal,
blake

On Sun, 10 Jan 2010 11:38:23 -0500, blake murphy
> wrote:

>On Sat, 09 Jan 2010 13:21:21 -0800, Dan Abel wrote:
>
>> In article >,
>> blake murphy > wrote:
>>
>>> my mistake. i have adobe, updated now to 8.3.1. right now i'm not sure
>>> what is used when i encounter a .pdf on the web.
>>
>> So I checked it out, on my machine. I use Firefox, and the default is
>> Preview. Looks like it would be trivial to change it to anything else I
>> wanted. Firefox doesn't actually open pdfs, it just downloads them and
>> then opens them in the specified application. Preview is working OK for
>> me.
>
>o.k., that will be another thing to dick around with in my idle moments.
>
I'm surprised you don't have a copy of Adobe Reader installed, but FF
also has a PDF plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/636


--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.

On Sun, 10 Jan 2010 13:58:23 -0800, sf wrote:

> On Sun, 10 Jan 2010 11:38:23 -0500, blake murphy
> > wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 09 Jan 2010 13:21:21 -0800, Dan Abel wrote:
>>
>>> In article >,
>>> blake murphy > wrote:
>>>
>>>> my mistake. i have adobe, updated now to 8.3.1. right now i'm not sure
>>>> what is used when i encounter a .pdf on the web.
>>>
>>> So I checked it out, on my machine. I use Firefox, and the default is
>>> Preview. Looks like it would be trivial to change it to anything else I
>>> wanted. Firefox doesn't actually open pdfs, it just downloads them and
>>> then opens them in the specified application. Preview is working OK for
>>> me.
>>
>>o.k., that will be another thing to dick around with in my idle moments.
>>
> I'm surprised you don't have a copy of Adobe Reader installed, but FF
> also has a PDF plugin.
> https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/636

actually, i do have adobe. i was mistaken about acrobat.

i did bookmark your pointer to look at later.

your pal,
blake