Talk:Nitro Pro
 | This article was nominated for deletion on 21 April 2013 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep. |
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Nitro Pro article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
| This article was nominated for deletion on 25 May 2006. The result of the discussion was keep. |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
Nitro PDF - alternative to Adobe
[edit]Nitro PDF is an good alternative to Adobe Acrobat and Adobe Reader. Last version of Nitro PDF that runs under Windows Me is 4.91.] Wikinger 13:47, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
- « Nitro PDF is an good alternative to Adobe Acrobat and Adobe Reader »
- I'm afraid it's never been that good. Semi-decent support for form items (buttons, etc) began with the last of the 5.x revisions, none of which BTW could create bookmarks linking to a specific page-view. And now that the versions 6.x depend on the stupid dot NET framework, Nitro PDF is a big no-no. 189.62.49.216 (talk) 17:25, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
Agreed, not only is that statement very advertisy. its untrue. Nitro PDF is unique for its own abilities in PDF and has features that Adobe doesnt have and vise versa. I use Nitro for its basic layout but it is buggy on large files. I think this line should be removed, becuase it is an opinion. It should read 'Nitro PDF is a PDF Editor similar to Adobe Acrobat'. Otherwise id remove the line. Mcris6 (talk) 23:48, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
The support team will provide the link on request, a special update is required to run 4.91 on Vista —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.206.204.219 (talk) 01:13, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
Things have changed
[edit]Nitro has come a long way since all of the above was written. I'm not an employee or dealer or anything like that; I have nothing to do with the company or its product, nor have any skin its its game. I'm simply both an end-user as well as an IT pro with pushing 40 years experience, and I've checked-out virtually every PDF product out there. In the past... oh... I dunno... I'd say maybe three or so years, Nitro PDF Pro has become a seriously worthy alternative to any full commercial version of Adobe Acrobat, and for a lot less money. And, like Acrobat, Nitro offers a best-of-breed freeware reader which, unlike Adobe's free reader, is capable of creating PDF files... and by three methods (specifying the file-to-be-made-into-a-PDF in the reader's interface, or dragging-'n-dropping it onto the reader's Windows desktop icon, or by "printing" to a virtual printer driver), to boot!
After trying the top four logical competitors for about three months each during 2013, I've come to the professional conclusion that Nitro PDF Pro is now the best alternative to pretty much any full version of Adobe Acrobat; and that Nitro's free reader is a far better default PDF reader on a person's Windows machine than is Adobe's free reader. Yes, of course, that's just my opinion, but it's my professional one, informed by nearly four decades of analyzing and reviewing and recommending such products (seriously; I go back to Acrobat version 1.0). I'm not saying Adobe Acrobat or its free reader is sub-standard; they are not: I still love those, too. I'm simply saying that Nitro has apparently been working overtime for the past three or so years to place itself at the unambiguously top of the heap, now, of Acrobat alternatives.
I hate that the article, now, contains misinformation (though I updated/corrected a little about the reader in it, today). I want to see if I can soon fix the problem rightly cited at the top of the article, which chides said article's not having third-party references. That's bad; and I hope to be able to fix that, over time, starting soon. There are plenty of articles and reviews out there, now, about Nitro; so it shouldn't be that hard! [grin]
Gregg L. DesElms (Username: Deselms) (talk) 00:57, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
the above sounds more like an advertisement that anything I've ever read on Wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.237.74.57 (talk) 19:09, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
Latest/ Stable Version
[edit]Latest or Stable version of Nitro Pro needs updating to 13.38.1.739, April 6, 2021, as of April 13. Don't know why, but my attempt to do so, per reference #1, failed.24.123.84.22 (talk) 17:26, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
COI Edit request for inaccurate statement
[edit] | This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest was declined. |
I am an employee of Nitro Software and would like to request the removal of an inaccurate statement or its replacement with an accurate statement.
- What I think should be changed: "As of June 2025, Nitro Software is graded F by the Better Business Bureau for the company's failure to respond to customer complaints." is no longer correct as of July 2025 - verified by checking the cited source. Removal is preferred or, if unsatisfactory to the editor, please change the statement to "As of July 2025, Nitro Software is not rated by the Better Business Bureau."
- Why it should be changed: The statement is inaccurate.
- References supporting the possible change (format using the "cite" button): [1]
Thank you,
Wikiworld05 (talk) 21:44, 31 July 2025 (UTC)Wikiworld05
References
- ^ Better Business Bureau https://www.bbb.org/us/ca/san-francisco/profile/computer-software-developers/nitro-software-inc-1116-136065. Retrieved 31 July 2025.
{{cite web}}: Missing or empty|title=(help)
Not done: I found a WayBackMachine page with the F rating. Likeanechointheforest (talk) 13:20, 2 August 2025 (UTC)
