Acrobat 2017 is now being rolled out

Topic

New Reply

Acrobat 2017 has been released this month, and Reader XI installations are now receiving messages to update to this new version.

Options for installation are Classic or Continuous, although Continuous still uses ‘DC’ branding:

“The Continuous track provides service-based tools as well as new features, security and platform enhancements, and bug fixes as part of frequent (and most often) silent updates. Over time, the Continuous track’s update cadence will be more frequent than the Classic track. Classic license program customers do not have access to this track for Acrobat.
The Classic track is similar to the 10.x-11.x model and does not provide new features in updates. Free services are available, but optional. Like previous releases, a quarterly update cadence delivers security and platform enhancements as well as bug fixes.“

However, the Classic installation’s EULA states that updates will be automatically performed and installed, and no user preference setting exists to affect this. This sounds like a “silent update”, doesn’t it? There is a link on Adobe’s Automatic Updates: Reader page, for Registry edits to change the behaviour of Updates, but it’s not clear if this applies to this latest version.

To find out more:
Adobe Reader: Release Notes
Acrobat 2017 Release (Classic Track)
Acrobat 2017: New Features Summary
Acrobat 2017 Reader Full Installer (.mui – 178MB)

1 user thanked author for this post.

jelson

Reply | Quote

Replies

Kirsty wrote:

However, the Classic installation’s EULA states that updates will be automatically performed and installed, and no user preference setting exists to affect this. This sounds like a “silent update”, doesn’t it? There is a link on Adobe’s Automatic Updates: Reader page, for Registry edits to change the behaviour of Updates, but it’s not clear if this applies to this latest version. To find out more: Adobe Reader: Release Notes Acrobat 2017 Release (Classic Track) Acrobat 2017: New Features Summary Acrobat 2017 Reader Full Installer (.mui – 178MB)

Wow if you can’t put the updates for Adobe anything into full manual control then forget it.  Adobe is notorious for bundling Adware / Cr*pware / Spyware / Malware into their update installers.  I have NO DOUBT they will install garbage automatically if given 1/10 the chance.

Viper

1 user thanked author for this post.

Bill C.

Reply | Quote

It looks like that registry edit is the only hope…

Reply | Quote

I have my Adobe Reader XI locked down to never check and instead use a manual check of the website. I got burnt one when a ‘security update’ installed the newer cloud linked Reader. I uninstalled it and all the Adobe directories on the PC and found my old install file and reintalled it and then completely turned off auto-updating in the settings and disabled the update check in Services.

If they go full auto, I go to SumatraPDF. Adobe always tried to install Google Chrome spyware and the Toolbar in manual updates of Flash, etc., and tried to ‘update’ me to the newer rolling distro of the Reader, so no way I go auto with them. Additionally, the last time I went to update Flash it would not let me download the full installer unless I disabled the tracking protection and ‘do not track’ in IE11.

I use it as a reader only. Besides Firefox has a reader. I have been testing and found SumatraPDF to be fully functional for my usage, although it has an old school primitive interface.

Reply | Quote

I use the autoupdate feature of Flash and never found anyone with Chrome installed by mistake. For me, it solved this annoying problem of having home users do updates manually on the web page and forget to unclick bundles. If Adobe is respectful and doesn’t force the installation of third-party stuff, it might not be such a bad thing for most usage. Yes, installing a game changing cloud based software doesn’t count as a non-disruptive update, just like resetting your privacy or worse security settings during major updates, but then why just not switch to a different reader? Reader is unnecessary for many, it is slow, bloated and have more security issues.

People who know me here know I am not a fan of anything Microsoft when it comes to what I think is bonus features that comes with the OS, in part due to finding them being unethical about data collection, but for those who don’t care, Edge will very soon have pdf annotation capabilities and the ability to fill forms if it doesn’t already. Installing a third-party pdf reader will become less and less important.

I prefer Firefox to view most pdf directly. It is more secure as it is a converted stripped down version of the pdf I see and with limited capabilities, as most of the time if not always, I don’t want to execute code, I just want to view a pdf docuement. When it doesn’t work for my need (rarely), I just click the top right button to download the file on the desktop and use Sumatra as configured per MrBrian instructions. So, this way, I have a more secure experience for most uses of viewing pdf from online sources and fallback for more advanced needs.

 

1 user thanked author for this post.

ch100

Reply | Quote

AlexEiffel wrote:

Reader is unnecessary for many, it is slow, bloated and have more security issues.

I used Sumatra for a while until I realised that it has too many limitations for my purpose. Specifically, certain types of forms cannot be filled in Sumatra.

I see a lot of non-sense posted here by other posters about moving away from Adobe Reader because it “goes away” whenever support ends. It does not go anywhere and can be used as is.
Fortunately there are not so many users who believe everything that is posted here, but those few who do, create a huge disadvantage for themselves in using computers effectively. Those are motivated by fear instead of achievement and prefer to set artificial limits for themselves instead of trying to find solutions to the problems they encounter.
Adobe Reader DC has manageable updating, although this functionality is hidden from non-technical users for the same reasons for which Windows and Chrome hides the same functionality, although it is available.
Is there any guarantee that other less used and alternative software created by a developer as a hobby at late hours after work does not have similar issues like Adobe Reader or worse?

3 users thanked author for this post.

Lori, AlexEiffel, Bienzani

Reply | Quote

Thanks for sharing your experience with Sumatra. Yes, it can be not enough for some people, but my main point is Reader is probably unnecessary for many home users. I try to do without it now for home users and my users when possible. With Edge being better at handling pdfs in the fall Creator’s update and Microsoft apparent commitment to the pdf features, the way to manage pdfs using an arguably supported scenario of using Microsoft products to do so presents an alternative I doubt you will dismiss too quickly given time.

In business, I regularly end up going back to Reader for some user cases, but I find Adobe a bit unprofessional in the way they handle updates (which by default disables some security settings you set if it is a major update and the way they pushed third-party products when updating from the web or when they needed administrator’s password for each minor update). I don’t care about automatic updates for that kind of software as long as it keeps my settings (especially the security settings), isn’t disruptive to work, doesn’t require administrator’s rights for minor updates (I’m fine with an autoupdater with rights which they got quite right) and doesn’t change the deal in any major way. In general, I find Adobe has been better at that in the last few years compared to when you had to go to the website all the time, I just find them not so great at how they do some things, like when they dropped support for Vista when it was still supported by Microsoft, even before they dropped support for XP. And you know my scenario and philosophy: I want “small business easy” to manage my computers and other users, I don’t use big business tools. I think it is manageable with Adobe up to a point.

I hope you didn’t find my comment as one of those you see as non-sense.

Although I didn’t make a comment about this, to respond to your comment, one can wonder if using an unpatched anymore Internet facing app is equivalent to it “going away”. From a security perspective, I consider such a program not working no more, as in not good enough for business use no more and not on my home computer either. Yes, you can tone down this affirmation depending on context, but in general, I wouldn’t say it is good advice to use an unpatched because unsupported working Acrobat pdf reader vs using a lesser known and targeted but still maintained product if said product seems to at least have some awareness of security considerations.

Of course, it is not always easy to distinguish when it is the case and the risk of using a product that is more a hobby is very real. I agree with you on this. My jaw dropped when Foxit first started to ask administrative rights each time it started so it can autoupdate instead of keeping this function distinct from the main program used to view documents and not view documents as administrator every time. On this whole subject, I have a philosophical position, just like I find outrageous that older IOS are not patched for security so in theory your phone becomes useless once it is too old to run the newer IOS comfortably and you would like to stick to an old one. Being pragmatic, it is then up to each person to decide what risk they are willing to take to run an unpatched OS or software and there might be very good reasons to do so (you remove personal sensitive data, you think the risk is still quite low because of the history of security of the device and other considerations, etc.). But, on a theoretical level, I will not condone using an unpatched software when it touches external data, especially not in a business context. I will probably run a data collecting supported software before an unsupported software in this context if I have no choice even if that won’t make me happy.

What worries me more about the comments here is people deciding to just stop updating, à la group W on Windows. I respect people’s choice, but I am not sure everyone always understand the extent of the risk they choose when they make these decisions. There are ways to minimize it using a combination of Reader and the browser’s native viewer, but on this particular aspect of the W philosophy, I concur with you that for less technical users, they should stick to supported paths and for me it means using something patched. That is why I suggested trying to view pdf files with Firefox or Edge and if it is good enough for the user, I think this scenario is better in terms of security than using Adobe’s products, which are no shining stars in terms of security history. For those who need Reader, maybe use the browser viewer whenever possible and reserve Reader for filling this occasional government form that is probably not tainted.

Does that make sense?

 

 

Reply | Quote

Adobe has indicated that support, including security updates, for Adobe Reader XI will end on October 15, 2017:

https://blogs.adobe.com/documentcloud/adobe-acrobat-xi-and-adobe-reader-xi-end-of-support/?trackingid=GCWTYNZL&mv=in-product

As Kirsty noted above, Adobe is encouraging Reader users to install Adobe Acrobat Reader DC, either the Continuous track version or the Classic track version, as described here:

http://www.adobe.com/devnet-docs/acrobatetk/tools/AdminGuide/whatsnewdc.html

The above link states that one reason for choosing the Classic track is that updates can be managed as they were managed in Reader X and XI.  However, Adobe states at the following link that “Adobe Acrobat Reader DC is set up for automatic updates by default. It does not provide any UI option in the preferences to control this setting.  IT Administrators can control the update settings using the Adobe Customization Wizard DC or the Windows Registry.”

https://helpx.adobe.com/acrobat/kb/automatic-updates—acrobat-reader.html

I would like to control the updating process.  However, I am not an IT Administrator, just a home user of two computers.  I have never edited the Windows Registry and do not want to start now, nor am I really interested in learning how to use the Adobe Customization Wizard DC.

Finally, the Classic track version of Adobe Acrobat Reader DC seems to be available only at Adobe’s FTP website which is a little cumbersome.

So, if you are still reading this my question is: Given my reluctance to edit the Windows Registry or learn how to use the Adobe Customization Wizard DC , am I going to have to give up control of the updating process?

Reply | Quote

@280park
Unless you specifically need to use an Adobe product (Acrobat or Reader) for some reason, it may be time for you to look at a different/alternative software option, if you feel you must upgrade from your current version you are currently using.

Reply | Quote

Yes, it looks like I will have to accept automatic updates to Adobe Acrobat Reader DC or find an alternative.  I have not made a decision.

I must admit to myself that my reluctance to accept automatic updating from Adobe is inconsistent with my acceptance of automatic and silent updates to my browser, Google Chrome.  Ah, the unfathomable mind.

Thanks for the reply.

 

Reply | Quote

Flash player auto-update (not in chrome that is different) seems to update ok, which is a surprise, auto updates are usually bad. It waits for the browsers to close, THEN updates. No reboot needed. Great!

Newer adobe reader notices are starts the update usually just after you open adobe reader. It updates while it is open with no way to make it wait. Then it needs a reboot. If you close it you can’t re-open it until reboot! Also it has needless explorer and browser plugins. Those cause locked files too preventing install without a reboot.

If it had just waited until I closed my browser / adobe reader it wouldn’t have needed a reboot. With no plugins (just open pdf outside the browser) it could even update with the browser open.

Reply | Quote