Reader would work for like 90% of people, but no, everyone needs Standard or Pro because reasons.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 78 points 2 years ago (7 children)

Conversely, IT is arguing about a $90 license on an employee that costs 80k. If it saves them 2 hours of productivity over the course of the year, it's an even trade, wouldn't you say?

  • source
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 55 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Yeah but those $90 savings make IT management look good, and that 80k/year doesn't come out of IT's budget. Also the productivity loss can't objectively be measured or will just be blamed on the employee.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 27 points 2 years ago

    Pisses me off no end when companies cheap out on IT equipment. I work in a place where a large number of us will be on £35 - £55k, yet the IT budget for each of us is less than 1% of our salary over 3 years.

    It's crazy. Don't employ professionals then give them low end enthusiast gear.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 20 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I blame accounting. Although I also think that Acrobat's price is BS.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago*

    If it was us, we wouldn't have to be fighting for the licenses either.

    It's usually some high level IT exec who thinks they'll get a bonus if they shave off $5K in expenses.

    It took me months to get them to allow it even though I need it. And in the end, they gave me Creative Suite for some reason.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    No shit man. I just pay for my own. Ain't worth arguing with IT. Saved me a shit ton of time reliably converting and editing PDFs.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    There is a free PDF editor called Sejda, it might do what you need and save you some money.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    This looks very promising for personal use, but as it is web-based it is almost certainly not HIPAA compliant which is a necessity for several professions.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago*

    Random aside, I'm always mildly amused because HIPAA (the US medical legislation) and FIPPA (the British Columbia privacy legislation) have similar requirements in many cases. :)

  • source
  • parent