For wiring regs fans:

The draft for public comment of BS 7671:2008 is now available as a free
download, with strings attached, from
http://www.iee.org/Publish/WireRegs/DPC/index.cfm

The strings attached a
quote
1. You must have Acrobat/Reader 7 or greater to read this file.

2. To open this file for the first time, you must be connected to the
Web, (/sic./)

3. You may subsequently open the file "offline" for a period of 30
days. It will not work after the DPC close date - 28 February 2007.

4. You are not permitted to give this file to anyone else, nor
distribute it via the Web, an intranet or in any other way.

5. You may direct others to the IET web site www.theiet.org/DPC where
they can obtain the file for themselves.

6. Printed copies (£50) may be obtained from the IET web site, or 01438
767 328 or

7. You must only send comments to the IEE on the official form, details
are given below:
/quote

Now, does anyone know whether installing Acrobat Reader 7 or 8 will
screw-up my existing installation of (full) Acrobat 5.0?

--
Andy

Andy Wade wrote:

Now, does anyone know whether installing Acrobat Reader 7 or 8 will
screw-up my existing installation of (full) Acrobat 5.0?

When you find out, let me know ;-)

(chances are it will reassign you file associations to point at the new
reader - you could manually point them back of course)

If in doubt:

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/virtualpc/default.mspx

I had a play with that the other night - seemed to work rather well,
just install, and run it to create a virtual machine. Then start the
virtual machine and install an os and software of choice. It is nicely
isolated in its own sandbox, and you can clone machines by simply
copying their hard files. Quite a nice way to experiment with software
without any risk to your stable platform. I have two WinXP MCEs and a
SuSE Linux running in parallel in their own windows now.

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

John Rumm wrote:
Andy Wade wrote:

Now, does anyone know whether installing Acrobat Reader 7 or 8 will
screw-up my existing installation of (full) Acrobat 5.0?

When you find out, let me know ;-)

I was hoping you'd be the one to tell me... :~)

(chances are it will reassign you file associations to point at the new
reader - you could manually point them back of course)

That's probably the easy bit. Altering the interaction between
Acrobat/Reader and Firefox is another area of potential grief, IME...

Of course another approach might be to find a "utility" that would
"convert" this PDF to one easier to read, if you follow my drift.

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/virtualpc/default.mspx
[...]
Quite a nice way to experiment with software without any risk to your
stable platform. I have two WinXP MCEs and a SuSE Linux running in
parallel in their own windows now.

Interesting. Does it gobble all your resources and grind exceeding
slowly, though?

--
Andy

"Andy Wade" wrote in message
...
John Rumm wrote:
Andy Wade wrote:

Now, does anyone know whether installing Acrobat Reader 7 or 8 will
screw-up my existing installation of (full) Acrobat 5.0?

When you find out, let me know ;-)

I was hoping you'd be the one to tell me... :~)

(chances are it will reassign you file associations to point at the new
reader - you could manually point them back of course)

That's probably the easy bit. Altering the interaction between
Acrobat/Reader and Firefox is another area of potential grief, IME...

Of course another approach might be to find a "utility" that would
"convert" this PDF to one easier to read, if you follow my drift.

This document can be printed.

You can print to a PDF from any application that can print, using "PDF995"
which is free!
http://www.pdf995.com/download.html

Sparks...

"Sparks" wrote in message
...
"Andy Wade" wrote in message
...
John Rumm wrote:
Andy Wade wrote:

Now, does anyone know whether installing Acrobat Reader 7 or 8 will
screw-up my existing installation of (full) Acrobat 5.0?

When you find out, let me know ;-)

I was hoping you'd be the one to tell me... :~)

(chances are it will reassign you file associations to point at the new
reader - you could manually point them back of course)

That's probably the easy bit. Altering the interaction between
Acrobat/Reader and Firefox is another area of potential grief, IME...

Of course another approach might be to find a "utility" that would
"convert" this PDF to one easier to read, if you follow my drift.

This document can be printed.

You can print to a PDF from any application that can print, using "PDF995"
which is free!
http://www.pdf995.com/download.html

Sparks...

My Bad, doesn't seem to work!

However, if you have "Microsoft Office Document Image Writer" installed, you
can print to that ok! (and them create a PDF from that using PDF995 if you
wish)

Sparks...

Andy Wade wrote:

Now, does anyone know whether installing Acrobat Reader 7 or 8 will
screw-up my existing installation of (full) Acrobat 5.0?

It certainly screwed up my full read/write Acrobat v4, as it would fight
with the later versions over file associations, and possibly other file
version and registration issues too.

One solution is to install v4 on a separate machine that doesn't do much
pdf reading, and run it across the network when you want to edit a file.


Thank you very much for keeping us informed about development on the
17th edition.


--
Ian White

However, if you have "Microsoft Office Document Image Writer" installed,
you can print to that ok! (and them create a PDF from that using PDF995 if
you wish)

Sparks...

So how big is yours??

Mine went from 4.3MB(original) to 43MB (MS Doc image) to 496MB(Cute PDF)

Archie

Andy Wade wrote:

For wiring regs fans:

The draft for public comment of BS 7671:2008 is now available as a free
download, with strings attached, from
http://www.iee.org/Publish/WireRegs/DPC/index.cfm

The strings attached a
quote
1. You must have Acrobat/Reader 7 or greater to read this file.

I wonder why "they" added that requirement.
One would imagine this would be a fairly standard PDF file.
Maybe there is a song in the middle?

--
Timothy Murphy
e-mail (80k only): tim /at/ birdsnest.maths.tcd.ie
tel: +353-86-2336090, +353-1-2842366
s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland

I wonder why "they" added that requirement.
One would imagine this would be a fairly standard PDF file.
Maybe there is a song in the middle?

Just guessing but it may be because its a time expired document.

Archie

Timothy Murphy wrote:

I wonder why "they" added that requirement.

Welcome to the brave new world of Digital Rights Management :-(

Timothy Murphy wrote:

1. You must have Acrobat/Reader 7 or greater to read this file.

I wonder why "they" added that requirement.

They're using 7's usage tracking and DRM features.

It's hard to tell just what they're tracking here, but it certainly
"phones home" to log who is reading it (by IP address) and probably
causes a time expiry in February.

I have no major problems running Acrobat 7, but then this is a big and
modern PC. However the DRM stuff is as badly coded as most Acrobat
products are and usually causes me problems by busying out the network
connection until I kill it manually. As I've got gigabit ethernet to my
desktop, that takes quite a bit of doing...

Andy Burns wrote:

Welcome to the brave new world of Digital Rights Management :-(

Some new meaning of the word "welcome" of which [etc.] ...

Seriously though, what are they trying to protect? All serious users
are going to have to buy the final printed copy in any case. Changes
between this and the final version are inevitable, and (AIUI) this DPC
version does not contain the definitions section, nor an index.

--
Andy

Huge wrote:

On 2007-01-11, Andy Dingley wrote:

Timothy Murphy wrote:

1. You must have Acrobat/Reader 7 or greater to read this file.

I wonder why "they" added that requirement.

They're using 7's usage tracking and DRM features.


[Makes mental note to stop using Acrobat]

Open Office writes pdf files quite adequately. Guess I'll have to find
a reader.

Foxit Reader is good, fast, free and small... It won't help you open
this particular document though which is encrypted using Adobe's DRM.

Steve

OK lets cut to the chase. Has anyone got a precis of the alterations
from the 16th edition?

"Archie" wrote in message
...

However, if you have "Microsoft Office Document Image Writer" installed,
you can print to that ok! (and them create a PDF from that using PDF995
if you wish)

Sparks...

So how big is yours??

Mine went from 4.3MB(original) to 43MB (MS Doc image) to 496MB(Cute PDF)

Archie


I left it in MS .mdi format, I didn't see the point in converting it back to
PDF.

Sparks...

cynic wrote:
OK lets cut to the chase. Has anyone got a precis of the alterations
from the 16th edition?

See previous threads here and the IEE summary at
http://www.iee.org/Publish/WireRegs/...troduction.pdf
(this one being an unrestricted PDF).

--
Andy

Now, does anyone know whether installing Acrobat Reader 7 or 8 will
screw-up my existing installation of (full) Acrobat 5.0?

Foxit might be immune to this crap (its an alternative pdf reader)

"Andy Burns" wrote in message
...
Timothy Murphy wrote:

I wonder why "they" added that requirement.

Welcome to the brave new world of Digital Rights Management :-(

You can add comments directly to document and send back to them

"cynic" wrote in message
oups.com...

OK lets cut to the chase. Has anyone got a precis of the alterations
from the 16th edition?


I don't remember specs for car towing sockets being in the 16th (page 210)

Andy Wade wrote:

John Rumm wrote:

Andy Wade wrote:

Now, does anyone know whether installing Acrobat Reader 7 or 8 will
screw-up my existing installation of (full) Acrobat 5.0?


When you find out, let me know ;-)


I was hoping you'd be the one to tell me... :~)

Hm, sorry about that, same boat he V5 full version installed and as
yet never found a serious need to have a later version. (I really ought
to upgrade to a later full version)

(chances are it will reassign you file associations to point at the
new reader - you could manually point them back of course)


That's probably the easy bit. Altering the interaction between
Acrobat/Reader and Firefox is another area of potential grief, IME...

Yup, it may do.

Of course another approach might be to find a "utility" that would
"convert" this PDF to one easier to read, if you follow my drift.

iText development suite for example... (handy the number of things it
can ignore (PDF restrictions, protection etc) ;-)

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/virtualpc/default.mspx
[...]
Quite a nice way to experiment with software without any risk to your
stable platform. I have two WinXP MCEs and a SuSE Linux running in
parallel in their own windows now.


Interesting. Does it gobble all your resources and grind exceeding
slowly, though?

Gobble, a bit, but not too bad. A couple of virtual Win MCE systems
running on a Win MCE system took some 1300MB RAM. That was allocating
256MB to each VM - although the software actually suggests allocating
only 128MB for WinXP. Speed however seems not far off full speed. Disk
IO is a tad slower when accessing a hard file - but overall very usable.

I just did a quick test: on my Athlon 64 x2 plaform, the commit charge
was running at 662MB (had been running some heavy stuff previously).
Starting the VM maager added 5MB. Booting a complete VM into MCE took it
up to 938MB. So the actual footprint over and above that which is
allocated to the VM looks like it is only 20MB.

All in all pretty impressive I thought (remember that this was something
MS bought from connectix rather than developed themselves;-)

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

Andy Wade wrote:

Andy Burns wrote:

Welcome to the brave new world of Digital Rights Management :-(


Some new meaning of the word "welcome" of which [etc.] ...

Seriously though, what are they trying to protect? All serious users

Their margins on the electronic version I expect!

are going to have to buy the final printed copy in any case. Changes
between this and the final version are inevitable, and (AIUI) this DPC
version does not contain the definitions section, nor an index.

Could be added to scanned copies of the missing pages though I expect,
which would go along way toward having a machine readable version.

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

Tim Morley wrote:

"Andy Burns" wrote in message
...

Timothy Murphy wrote:


I wonder why "they" added that requirement.

Welcome to the brave new world of Digital Rights Management :-(


You can add comments directly to document and send back to them

You can do that in 5.0

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

In article ,
"Tim Morley" tim.morley*REMOVE writes:

"Andy Burns" wrote in message
...
Timothy Murphy wrote:

I wonder why "they" added that requirement.

Welcome to the brave new world of Digital Rights Management :-(

You can add comments directly to document and send back to them

You can add comments directly, but that's only for your benefit.
They will only take comments back in the format given on their
website, which is on a different form.

--
Andrew Gabriel

Andy Wade wrote:

Of course another approach might be to find a "utility" that would
"convert" this PDF to one easier to read, if you follow my drift.

Can you print it? (i.e. is printing allowed when you open it in
Acrobat Reader?) If so it's pretty trivial to store it in a format
which won't 'expire'.

--
Chris Green

Huge wrote:

On 2007-01-11, stevelup wrote:

Foxit Reader is good, fast, free and small...

Although the chances of it running on a non-Windows, non-Intel
computer are quite small. )

Indeed but then non-Windows, non-Intel computers have plenty of other
good, fast, free and small ways of viewing PDF's...

Steve

On 2007-01-12, stevelup wrote:

Although the chances of it running on a non-Windows, non-Intel
computer are quite small. )

Indeed but then non-Windows, non-Intel computers have plenty of other
good, fast, free and small ways of viewing PDF's...

Have you found one that will open that file?

Adam Funk wrote:

On 2007-01-12, stevelup wrote:

Although the chances of it running on a non-Windows, non-Intel
computer are quite small. )

Indeed but then non-Windows, non-Intel computers have plenty of other
good, fast, free and small ways of viewing PDF's...

Have you found one that will open that file?

Well no! Because it's encrypted using Adobe's proprietary DRM...

I wasn't at any point suggesting that it could read *this* file - my
response was to the previous post by 'Huge' where he said:- "Open
Office writes pdf files quite adequately. Guess I'll have to find a
reader."

Regards,

Steve