Just try to open a PDF editor in any Linux based distribution. Why do you niggers shill this product so much again?
>>54682691
>2016
>trying to edit a pdf
>>54682691
> Open with LibreOffice Writer
>>54682702
???
>>54682691
Foxit reader, faglard
>>54682756
It works but shit looks awful.
>>54682765
>Foxit reader
>reader
>>54682765
I guess the chinks have turned into jews.
>>54682691
>pdf editor
pdf is not for editing, retard
>>54682796
You gotta be at least 18 to be posting here clueless winkid
>>54682691
pdf is not meant to be edited.
even designated expensive editor in winblows won't always do the job 100% perfect.
>>54682691
because it just werks™?
>>54682782
He said LibreOffice Writer, not Draw
>>54682990
PDF file is not a formatted text file and shouldn't be treated as such.
Who the fuck edits pdfs ?
>>54682990
LibreOffice won't even allow the PDF to be opened. You try it and show me if it works.
>>54682990
LibreOffice Writer will open only Hybrid PDFs. PDFs are imported in Draw only.
Besides,
>>54682691
PDF isn't supposed to be edited. It's a publishing format.
The only thing where the GNU/World really lags behind ENTERPRISE QUALITY software is
- PDF readers being able to discern and validate electronically signed documents (in the current year only Adobe Acrobat Reader can do that)(even if there are some rudimental tools to sign PDFs according to Adobe's specs in the GNU ecosystem. Don't even attempt to bring up GPG here anyway FFS)
- PDF-making software capable of ****reliably and consistently***** creating PDF/A-{1,2}{a,b} documents - pretty much a legal standard nowadays (ghostscript sometimes fucks it up; only Adobe Acrobat is really reliable here)
>>54682691
Open it in GIMP, dipshit.
>>54683107
>PDF isn't supposed to be edited. It's a publishing format.
That's like saying my dick isn't meant for fucking.
>>54683173
Whilst arguably it's true that you aren't supposed to fuck and spread your genes around, the comparison you're trying to convey with le r9k frog is poor.
PDFs aren't meant to be edited.
PDFs don't have the sources of the document even if they can carry some of its metadata in non-standard ways. Any approach at editing PDFs is actually an attempt to re-interpret it in some automated ways, and this will always lead to a bunch of caveats you can't rely on.
>http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?PdfSucks
>>54682702
>>54682895
>>54682955
>>54683016
>>54683019
>>54683107
>>54683336
ITT people who will never hold down a job with us normies who edit pdfs.
>implying we're ever going to acknowledge what you *think* should be done
PDFs are not for fucking editing
>>54683757
Why the fuck would anyone edit pdfs on a regular basis? What's the point? If you're working on a document that is still changing you work in an editable format (docx if you're a normalfag). Only when you finalize and publish a document you use pdf.
>>54683780
It's invaluable when you need to alter documents like bills and forms
>>54683801
You're not supposed to alter bills and forms from an existing PDF. If you're not a scammer, you have the PDF sources.
>>54684094
You have no idea how poorly these things are managed in many companies have you?
>>54682691
2016
Still using PDFs
>>54684094
>>54684110
>get pdf from insurance broker
>need to have staff doctor electronically sign
>edit pdf to attach scanned signature
>send back over email
Simple
>>54684153
Xfa forms are an abomination and aren't part of the standard. Even acrobat reader on windows is shit at filling those out.
you can install adobe reader
at least on ubuntu
>>54684143
what do you use instead of PDFs?
or do you just like not read?
>>54684319
http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/why-not-pdf.html
https://www.nngroup.com/articles/avoid-pdf-for-on-screen-reading/
Note that the second link is from 2001. Today we have epub and mobi if you want to read.
PDF nowaydays makes sense only as >>54683107
>PDF/A-{1,2}{a,b} documents - pretty much a legal standard
The fact that freetards don't know about Master-pdf-editor is beyond me, and instead go about why would you edit a PDF, fucking retarded fucks.
>>54685901
Only a retard would
- get watermarked PDFs
- pay to edit PDFs
rather than editing the sources.
>b-but I-I don't have the sources
Then you're either a scammer or a tech illiterate.
>>54685969
Linux version doesn't have watermarks and you can still buy the pro version.
Stay cucked Windown user.
Just use Okular.
>>54682691
>"""""portable""""" document format
>>54686251
It can make annotations, that's all.
>>54686224
I'm not a Windows user, and you're both wrong (about the watermarks not being present in the linux version) and retarded (about buying this closed source crap).
>>54686489
>annotations
and those are not saved with the document.
>>54683173
because you write in something smarter
tex
>>54682691
There is not a good PDF editor for ANY platform. PDFs are practically read-only no matter what system you use. They are for sharing the final product and nothing more.
Kinda offtopic, serious dumb question guys:
What went wrong during the design of pdf?
Why is it so hard to properly edit it?
I get that maybe it wasnt designed to be edited,
but still, we constantly have to juggle around different formats.
Why is there no universal solution for docs?
Because they're NEETs
Why would a NEET need to open a pdf? No non NEETs use linux unironically
>>54686878
>Why is there no universal solution for docs?
There are several. None of them are very good.
I use HTML most of the time.
>Editing pdfs
that's like making a chart in excel, saving it as a pic, and then editing the pic
>>54686878
Different formats for different purposes.
PDF is essentially used as a vector graphics format in most instances, so editing it would be more like editing an image (select shapes, use the text tool, et cetera).
Anyway, just keep your original text file and you can edit to your heart's content and then re-publish in PDF as needed.
>>54684143
I second this. Why in godsname does this format exist? Why would you ever prefer layout oriented formats over content oriented? Portability is just a lame excuse. Any device that can render PDf can render html or similar markup languages.
>>54688842
In the real world, sending a layout-oriented format is the best way to guarantee that the end user sees exactly what you intend.
Look at how MS Word renders OpenOffice docs. Look at how IE renders HTML. Look at how MUTT renders HTML emails.
Okular
