The oldest version of Acrobat that works with Windows XP is 5.05.
I am using Acrobat 4.05c. I keep getting "An unrecoverable error occured in Capture Server" when trying to do a paper capture of a scanned (or saved and loaded) doent. The capture goes fine, until it starts saving the file. I had upgraded from Win 98SE to XP, and uninstalled Acrobat before the upgrade. Then I reinstalled Acrobat after XP was running. I have tried the Compatibility Wizard, and even have tried saving to a FAT32 drive, instead of the NTFS drive XP uses. I also tried running Acrobat as Administrator, to see if that might be an issue...and nothing ...
I am using Acrobat 4.05c. I keep getting "An unrecoverable error occured in Capture Server" when trying to do a paper capture of a scanned (or saved and loaded) doent. The capture goes fine, until it starts saving the file. I had upgraded from Win 98SE to XP, and uninstalled Acrobat before the upgrade. Then I reinstalled Acrobat after XP was running. I have tried the Compatibility Wizard, and even have tried saving to a FAT32 drive, instead of the NTFS drive XP uses. I also tried running Acrobat as Administrator, to see if that might be an issue...and nothing helped. I don't want to have to spring for an upgrade, since version 4.05 worked just fine. Anyone have any ideas?
The oldest version of Acrobat that works with Windows XP is 5.05.
I guess I am out of luck then. But interestingly, two temporary files are created, and remain after the error occurs...
The .aci file appears to be the about the right size to be some precursor to my pdf. Any hope of using these somehow? Or am I just totally out of luck?
You could try capturing on page at a time.
Also it could be worthwhile increasing the virtual memory paging file and seeing if that brings better results.
Ultimately an upgrade is the safest option - see if you can pick up a cheap copy of Acrobat 5 from ebay or similar.
I suffer from the same problem - paper capture 2.01 gives an address violation error just before completing processing of the first page. Nothing I can configure gets rid of it. (It clearly isn't a memory issue because I resurrected an old 486 based Win 95 PC with only 32mb RAM, installed 4.5c from my CD and processed my 11 page doent on that in 30 minutes. Is that an invitation for Adobe to sue me for now having two copies of Acrobat installed? :-)
But I am very unhappy about the seeming policy of Adobe to this issue. Everything else in Acrobat 4.05c seems to work fine under XP. Why not Paper Capture? Why do I have to upgrade at considerable expense to get an outright bug in the product fixed?
My installation readme say:
System Requirements for Acrobat 4.0 Windows
- Microsoft Windows 95, Windows 98, or Windows NT. 4.0 with Service Pack 4 or later
Apart from anything else I read "or later" to include NT 5
So what is the big deal in moving to NT 5 (Win XP)? It surely isn't anything like so big a leap as from Win 95 to NT. If it had worked properly under NT 4 shouldn't it also work properly under NT 5?
I conclude it was buggy under NT4 and that NT5, being stricter in some respects, exposed the bug. (Though I assert that, it is with a considerable level of ignorance of the underlying fundamentals so I would be happy to be corrected by someone who actually knows the true nature of the problem)
In my view, Capture 2.01 under Acrobat 4.05c deserves a proper support update to enable it to work under Win XP.
In an effort to see if Adobe had addressed this I downloaded the Acrobat 5 Paper Capture update but it will not install unless Acrobat 5 is found.
william it's not an outright bug, it's an incompatability issue, not the same thing.
My guess is that the papercapture process need OS files and that the files on XP are simply too new and therefore not recognized by the papercapture process. Still it's worth trying the suggestions made in post 1.
"Apart from anything else I read "or later" to include NT 5"
the later bit refers to the NT 4 service packs 6a being the most recent. Btw NT 5 is windows 2000 and not XP if I'm not mistaken.
2k and XP are quite different from NT, especially when it comes to their printing systems.
I conclude that you jumped to some wrong conclusions. In the IT industry something can and will be out of date within 2 years or less. This means there's a constant cycle of upgrading.
You started the cycle by upgrading your OS. Now you've made that step you'll find that more and more of your old software will no longer work full, or will not work at all. So time to follow up that step and upgrade the software into the 21st centuary...
Although it's your view that old products deserve support (and it's a view i sympathise with), the view of common business sense won't make that happen.
yes i can see software companies bosses dancing and singing to the KC Sunshine band:
"That's the way
I like it
aha . . .
Thanks for your thoughts but I do tend to disagree.
First the trivial point, my system information gives me:
OS Name Microsoft Windows XP Professional
Version 5.1.2600 Service Pack 1 Build 2600
Also, when it starts XP tells me, quite rightly, it is based on NT.
Second, the historical one:
Acrobat 4.05c runs under Win 95, 98 and NT4
That suggests to me that it grew from a Win 95 code base through to NT4. This impression is also reinforced by the fact that capserve.exe, the guilty application, does not log its errors in the NT event system.
Third, when Win2K (NT5) came out what happened?
some support updates for Acrobat 4.05 appeared. See <http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/detail.jsp?ftpID=1030>
"To install Update 2:
1. If you use Windows NT or Windows 2000, log in as Administrator.
2. Double-click the Acrobat 4.0.5 Update 2 file.
3. Follow the on-screen instructions."
This shows, by implication, that all was supposed to be well for Win2K, i.e. NT5
As far as I am aware it was OK with Win2K.
But a minor upgrade of OS, from 5.0 to 5.1 (Win2k to WinXP) does not work. This upgrade (5 to 5.1) is marketed by Microsoft as principally one of User Friendliness. The first upgrade (98 to Win2k aka NT5) was marketed as Sysadmin Friendliness.
Lastly, the error itself.
I get a popup window with the title: "DDE Server Window: Capserve.exe - Application Error" and contents:
"The instruction at 0x77f580db referenced memory at 0x00000000 the memory could not be written"
There could be two situations here:
1 it was doing that in all the earlier versions but those OS's were simply not trapping the error i.e. they were ignoring the illegal "write"
2 capserve is not coping gracefully with some changes in system dll's, unlike applications written following good MS practises, which do.
Regarding your other points, I have several applications running here that date from Win3.1 or Win 95. They all work fine - in terms of major functionality at least and certainly do not crash. Cooledit 96, first installed on Windows for Work Groups 3.1, I think, in 96, Inspiration 4.0, 1994, Personal Librarian for Windows 4.15, May 1995. As it happens the last two are also cross platform apps (Windows and Mac) and certainly, in the case of Personal Librarian written using a common code base with a cross platform toolkit (XVT or somesuch).
To my mind, leaving customers in the lurch like this is bad business. I have Compaq hardware that I fetched software updates for the BIOS and everything else over the last four years to see it from Win95, that it started with, through to WinXP now. Over the same timespan my wife's Sony VAIO has disappeared off the face of the earth as far as Sony is concerned - it started on Win2K and nothing is available for it to upgrade. Thus no matter how flashy the kit - guess which manufacturer I shall stick with and recommend?
Acrobat 4.05 works as well in Xp in terms of major functionality...
Paper capture is not part of the major functionality, creating and opening pdf files is. But that's prob just my opinion which you no doubt want to argue.
In any case you can argue what you want but it won't change the situation. Also have you tried the suggestions mentioned in post 1 yet?
Done everything there and more before I made my first posting. Including switching off all AV stuff, using compatibility wizard on capserve.exe, scouring the newsgroups etc etc. The only cheap solution seems to be to buy a bootleg copy of Acrobat 6 - plenty of them on eBay :-( I haven't tried the FAT business. If I were to do that I might as well install a Win 95 VM on my pc and run Acrobat in that.
Re moaning - I don't know - perhaps one day someone in Adobe will read it and think twice before stuffing their customers.
And who knows - this may encourage Adobe's competitors to improve their offerings. The one day when I do come to upgrade perhaps I will buy a third party tool for creating my Acrobat files and another one for OCR - even if more expensive - provided they look like they will look after me.
As far as I can see Adobe do not care to tell us that 4.05 will not work in XP. I don't count saying nothing about the impact of OS upgrades on relatively expensive software as a business like response to the situation.
As far as I can see Adobe do not care to tell us that 4.05 will not work
Seeing how 4.05 came out about 3 years before Windows XP that's not really a surprise.
Here's a warning: Acrobat 3 will not work with Windows 2012.
I mean it is a surprise that Adobe do not care to tell us, offically, here on this site, that upgrading from Win2K to XP (marketed by MS as a User Friendly upgrade) will lose you some Acrobat functionality. And that they don't intend fixing their bug.
What did you think I meant?
And there is no law of nature that says Acrobat 3 will not work on Windows 2012. Perhaps by the time they get to 2012 MS will have figured out how to do compatability properly so it supports all prior versions of apps back to Windows 1 implementations. Maybe by that version you will be able to run ancient Mac apps too. Do you know what MS are going to do?
Myself, I think you are bluffing :-)
OK enough bickering.
FACT Acrobat 6.0 is released. The development team will be working on Acrobat 7 or whatever.
A SMALLER team may be looking into bugs in 6.0 that have been reported on the tested platforms.
No resource left for bugs in older versions of Acrobat that have manifested themselves in operating systems that did not exist when it was tested.
Speaking from experience, the development cycle can, and will only test new releases on currently released OS and supporting software. Once this cycle is finished, and the product is handed over to marketing, that's it, job done, bugs or not. Management will to fix bugs is small for the current software, less so for 'old' software, that the Management don't want you to use anyway.
That's the way of the world, software companies are not in it for the good of their customers (despite Microsoft's latest ad campaign).
It is a shame that 4.05 capture does not work on Windows XP as it did on 2000, clearly a change in the OS somewhere, however, Adobe are not going to address this.
Yes indeed. But, someone made an incorrect ogy in one of the forums saying that you cannot use a Model T on modern freeways - well you can (at least in Europe).
If Adobe are as uncaring as you suggest it will hurt them in the long run. Why? because once bitten twice shy. And worse - if I see an unhappy (perhaps even uncaring) support policy then I start to figure out purchasing decisions based on anticipated or likely changes in releases of software and OS rather than making them on the needs of the time. In other words I deliberately delay purchase until the way becomes clear.
In other words I wait for a newish OS from MS and then a newish version of Acrobat that specifically says it is validated for that version OS.
When I bought 4.05, autumn 2000, Win 2K was in the field but I was running a corporate Win95. The box said ...NT 4 but everyone agreed it would be ok on 2K. So it turned out to be.
But I won't make that mistake again. I shall create a VM and run 4.05 in that until OS and Acrobat have s simultaneous(ish) new release.
And working out that idea, of a virtual machine, was a good result from having this debate - so thanks everyone who helped me get there.
Happy Queens day everyone.
Anyhow, William have you tried getting support for those applications you mentioned earlier?
Also Adobe isn't the only s/w compnay with this business model. Any company will stop supporting obsolete software. With perhaps the exception of smaller developers.
The lesson here is indeed take care when upgrading your OS, not all your software will work as it used to. Or if you upgrade as soonas at least test it in a controlled environment.
The following qoute might not be entirely relevant but it amused me
I suppose that Adobe-bashing is nothing new in this kind of public forum, but Acrobat 6 PDF Bible author Padova tried to put things in perspective: "I keep hearing from people driving $30,000 automobiles to their $300,000 houses to turn on their $5,000 computers and use their $500 Office software installed on their $200 operating systems asking, 'Why can't I get more free stuff from Adobe?'"
Full planetpdf article: <http://www.planetpdf.com/mainpage.asp?webpageid=3497&nl>
I'm not looking for freebies - I expect Adobe to charge enough for any initial purchase to keep the product working over say the next three year's worth of OS's. So whenever I buy, I know that when I upgrade Windows there will be a maintenance release of product that keeps it functioning in the new Windows. (These maintenance releases should have nothing to do with product upgrades i.e. 4 to 5, 5 to 6. After all, an upgrade may in fact lose functionality from an earlier version)
That way I don't have this second guessing game of having to wait before making a purchase decision and Adobe don't have to wait for my purchase: I can spend my money in confidence I won't be stung for a hefty upgrade fee (and potential loss of functionality) in the next six months.
Compaq (now HP of course) can do it with drivers for their hardware, at least the business class notebooks which are my experience. Why not Adobe with software?
And secondarily - if Adobe do in fact have a policy of keeping (or not keeping) product alive and well through a fixed number of years of OS release (say three from date of purchase) it would be wise of them to publish the fact, rather than let disgruntled customers hit the llimits without realising it and then spreading the word.
Or, to put it another way, you want every other software company to
subsidise Microsoft. If Microsoft make a new OS, and it breaks
existing software, all other companies should stop their new
developments, and - for free - find out why all their existing
software has broken and ship fixes. Meanwhile, Microsoft get all the
income from the upgrades purchased.
That will sure help cut Microsoft down to size.
(Just another perspective. By the way, if three years was your
criterion, three years are up - Acrobat 5.0 has been around that long,
and Acrobat 4.05 more than four years).
Or, to put it another way, you want every other software company to subsidise
I said I didn't want freebies - just a straight commercial proposition. You may as well say that MS subsidises the hardware manufactures - think of all that extra memory needed to run newer Os's. Should we all complain about Intel?
all other companies should stop their new developments,
you mean they don't plan these things??
and - for free - find out why all their existing software has broken
they should certainly look see if they had bugs that a corresponding bug in the earlier OS allowed through. Further than that they need a commercial policy of keeping customers on board at the right price.
if three years was your criterion, three years are up... Acrobat 4.05
more than four years
Read my words - I want product that I can use for three years after I bought it. 4.05 was the leading edge product in Autumn 2000 when I bought it for several hundred USD. XP was out around a year later and the product doesn't work on that platform.
I bought a Compaq Armada M700 in Summer 2001 with Win95 and Win98. The M700 range was over a year old at that time. Since then the HP web site has provided me with white papers, drivers etc etc to get to Win2K and then Win Xp. See for example <http://h18007.www1.hp.com/support/files/Armada/us/download/17595.html>
If the hardware guys can see a business requirement in it, why not software?
I can tell you why the hardware guys do it - because customers gain confidence they are not going to be left holding a dog. Potential customers don't have to wait for the hardware and software to match up before they make a purchase decision. They can rely on the various vendors to work the compatability issues out without hitting them in the pocket each time there is a change.
And I for one am more than willing to pay the small premium on initial purchase price to get that security.
As I hope I have said - my main complaint is that Adobe are not behaving like a major league player in this respect. If they have a "let's throw them to the dogs" policy why not spell it out? If they haven't, good, but why not spell it out? and work through the consequences.
And as a finale on this - yesterday I installed Microsoft Virtual PC 2004 and with that built a virtual Windows 98 PC on my laptop using an old Windows 98 kit. On that virtual Win 98 PC I installed Adobe 4 from my original CD. Set up a shared folder to transfer files to and from my host OS. Put my PDF into that. Run Acrobat 4 and Paper capture on the virtual PC, open the scanned doent and it works fine.
Problem solved. Legacy app running fine on my bang up-to-date OS. No need to buy Acrobat upgrade.
Glad you have it fixed. You really do prefer giving money to
Microsoft, don't you...
You really do prefer giving money to Microsoft, don't you...
Unless of course the VPC is pirated in which case William is coming up trumps and prefers to rip-off Microsoft as opposed to Adobe!