Slashdot Mirror
Google Builds a Native PDF Reader Into Chrome
An anonymous reader writes "Google's latest Chrome 6 Developer Update comes with a few subtle GUI changes, but there is also a major update under the hood. As its ties with Adobe quite apparently grow stronger, there is not just an integrated Flash player, but also a native PDF reader in the latest version of Chrome 6. Google says the native reader will allow users to interact with PDF files just like they do with regular HTML pages. The reader is included in Chrome versions (Chromium) 6.0.437.1 and higher, and you can use the feature after you have enabled it manually in the plug-ins menu. That is, of course, if you can keep Chrome 6 alive — Windows users have reported frequent crashes, and Google has temporarily suspended the update progress to find out what is going on." The Register has some more details on the PDF plugin and a link to Google's blog post about it.
PDF is actually a useful standard when it comes to reproducing printed or printable documents. The worst thing about PDF is Adobe's Reader implementation. Hopefully, this is a clean implementation, not based on Adobe's lousy, slow, insecure Reader code. I know they say its sandboxed, but still.
Anyone using Safari or Firefox (extension here) on the Mac has been able to do this for some time; PDFs are a lot better without the Adobe plugin.
Whether you like it or not, use it or not, have a choice or not, the fact is both Flash and Adobe Reader will be there anyway on 99% of the PCs. Google is to be appreciated for taking them under its fold so to speak - instead of leaving them as separate addons that never get into the final browser build testing and regression testing. Integrating these and testing and deploying it as a whole package is certainly better for stability as well as security.
I'm not fully qualified to comment on this since I will never be a Chrome user until someone forks off a "stainless steel" release where a group of people have poured over the source code to ensure there is no Google data collecting going on and then compiles it themselves for distribution.
No, I think what you want is the "tinfoil hat" release.
But seriously, it's called Chromium. It's the fully open source project that feeds into Chrome, and it's free of all Google branding and such. For what it's worth though, there's nothing in Chrome that does anything remotely close to what you're afraid of. Feel free to run it for a couple of weeks through a debugging proxy to watch what it does (I have).
Or am I misunderstanding that feature?
Saying "PDF files will render as seamlessly as HTML" is not the same as "PDF files will render as HTML".
So, yes, I think you misunderstand.
"Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
Actually google already has an excellent online PDF viewer, it seems to display PDFs as an image, but still manages selection of words, searching and copying. Here is a sample IRS PDF I wouldnt be surprised, if the same code was converted into a chrome plugin.
PDFs tend to bloat for at least two reasons - one is the inclusion of tons of rasters and other embedded objects, and that's a problem between chair and keyboard - the resultant documents are just was was asked for. The other is that PDF is (a superset of) a subset of Postscript. Some combinations of software and the drivers that generate PDFs, can do insanely redundant things that cause massive documents. One neat workflow I saw several years ago was placing raster images into Illustrator objects, then through a DTP program to be rendered to PDF. That particular software stack/combination of transformations managed add something like 400x bloat compared to the same document produced in a different way.
Generating non-insane Postscript used to be a solved problem, but it appears to come back every so often.
Also, changes in the PDF happened some time back that had big size advantages. Documents generated by old PDF renderers are going to tend to be larger than those generated by newer ones. (I don't really recall the details, but some of it was how embedded objects are stored.)
I forget what 8 was for.
Yeah, because a web page should look exactly the same on my smartphone as it does on my 1080p display....
I don't think the OP understands the purpose of a markup language, a browser, or the idea the pages should render gracefully on different devices. And that's okay so long as he's not a Web developer.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
> if you can keep Chrome 6 alive — Windows users have reported frequent crashes, and Google has temporarily suspended the update progress to find out what is going on.
I've experienced Chrome crashes too - more frequently than IE or Firefox. And that's a big problem with Chrome: You can't turn off Automatic updates(*). You will find several hundred meg vanishing from your download quota. I guess the Google developers with their top-of-the-line hardware forget that us regular folks care about things like bandwidth, disk space (it leaves the downloaded files sitting on your hard drive - multiple versions) and quotas (because I don't want to go over my peak quota because some punk program won't take directions). It also jumps up and starts downloading and installing even if you're in the middle of something.
I'd rather schedule my own updates to fit my own schedule - I don't want some program stuffing up when I'm in the middle of something. Chrome has some nice features - it's fast and it doesn't waste the screen space or have the memory bloat that Firefox or IE do, but Chrome crashes a lot and in the end I figured Firefox was best because it at least gives you some control over your PC. Chrome doesn't.
* = Google do provide a way for Enterprise users to modify the groups policy because (as described in their faq) 'enterprises should be able to schedule their own updates'. But Joe Public doesn't get that luxury, and there's no checkbox to turn it up like every other software is decent enough to provide. BTW don't try the REGEDITS; they don't work. Google know about all this because there are many posts complaining about it (search for 'disable chrome automatic updates'), but in the usual corporate arrogance won't even acknowledge the problem: pesky customers! Google think they know what's best.
http://www.google.com/search?q=disable+chrome+automatic+updates
From a security point of view, I'd feel better if Google wrote their own PDF implementation. Far be it for me to read TFA, but I get the impression that this code comes from Adobe, whose software generally makes me nervous.
I've read it for you. The code doesn't come from Adobe, Google wrote it themselves. It also uses Google's new sandboxed plugin API, so it would be less of a security concern even if it did.
(I'm surprised you got two replies who also didn't RTFA.)
Want a high quality FOSS RTS game? Try Warzone 2100!
Geez, it seems like I was just upgraded to 5 last week.
You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
because TFA doesn't explain that google wrote it themselves. Heck, even the google blog announcement doesn't explain that google wrote it themselves. Guess what, it turns out google did not write it themselves, they're using libpdf.so which is libpdf
I was referring to the Google blog post, which is linked from the Slashdot summary and thus counts as "TFA".
It says "Currently, we do not support 100% of the advanced PDF features found in Adobe Reader, such as certain types of embedded media" and "We would also like to work with the Adobe Reader team to bring the full PDF feature set to Chrome using the same next generation browser plug-in API", which I took to mean that:
1. it clearly isn't being written by Adobe, and
2. even if Google didn't write it, they are maintaining and improving it, so they "wrote it" in the same sense that Apple "wrote" WebKit.
As for the "libpdf.so", part, I assume you're looking at the part of the code that says
#if defined(OS_WIN) // Linux and Chrome OS
cur = cur.Append(FILE_PATH_LITERAL("pdf.dll"));
#elif defined(OS_MACOSX)
cur = cur.Append(FILE_PATH_LITERAL("PDF.plugin"));
#else
cur = cur.Append(FILE_PATH_LITERAL("libpdf.so"));
#endif
Which means that they're using a file called libpdf.so on Linux. As another one of your replies points out, this is doubtful to be the 9-year-old unmaintained incomplete C library you link to, and judging from the Windows and Mac filenames, this is nearly definitely a library written (or at least maintained) by Google.
Want a high quality FOSS RTS game? Try Warzone 2100!
Why use a confusing picture (Wrench and Piece of paper?) when perfectly clear text can be used.
The wrench has been a universal configuration icon as long as we've had icons. In fact, using a wrench to denote the storage of tools predates computers considerably. The truly crafty would drill holes in a crappy wrench, add standoffs, and use it as the handle for a tool drawer. Windows 7 includes a wrench icon for configuration on most notifications. Similarly, a picture of a document has been the symbol for document manipulation as long as we've had icons as well; and further, it has long been present on toolbars.
Or, short form, if you are confused by a wrench and a piece of paper, you are a pathetic tool user. Get off my lawn, if you can manage to walk in a straight line.
Similarly, should I have all my mp3's in one folder, or should I have subfolders by artists and albums, or some other criterion for example?
It's not similar. And BTW, if your filesystem doesn't suck, and your player has decent metadata support, it doesn't matter how you store your mp3s as long as you use a naming convention that supports them all being in the same place.
Anyways, that's why I like the traditional "file edit view history bookmarks tools help" interface. Faster and more organized IMHO
But you're wrong. It's slower and less organized. Menus are piles of functions loosely grouped. Chrome's interface is designed to show you the controls you commonly need. Do you really need to go to the edit menu for copy/cut/paste? Everyone I know knows the keyboard shortcuts, even my artist/chef lady love has managed to get those down, and when she forgets them, she uses the context menu, which is the second place you should go. The menu is a distant third (largely because it is distant) and you don't need to go there except to change encoding or report a bug, two things done very infrequently. I use the wrench menu slightly more often because I like to mess with extensions, but everything commonly used in there has a keyboard shortcut or an interface button... except the bookmarks button, for which you need an extension.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"