Good for creating PDFs; not so good at fixing PDFs for accessibility
July 02, 2021

Good for creating PDFs; not so good at fixing PDFs for accessibility

Anonymous | TrustRadius Reviewer
Score 2 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User

Software Version

Power PDF Advanced

Overall Satisfaction with Kofax Power PDF (formerly Nuance)

I bought it to evaluate as a possible replacement for the expensive Adobe Acrobat DC Pro. We cannot evaluate software through work since we are not in the IT support part of the agency. Our line of business used to use 500 licenses of PDF Converter Enterprise, but a consolidation of IT in the agency resulted in Acrobat replacing it. A top need is to make existing PDFs accessible (meet WCAG 2.2 and PDF/UA-1).
  • Exports a nice PDF from Microsoft Word.
  • It lets you create a PDF version 2.0 PDF.
  • You can check against the PDF/UA PDF structure standard.
  • The Tags panel lacks the ability to "Find tag from selection."
  • There seems to be no equivalent of the Acrobat "Content" panel.
  • It's harder than Acrobat to make fine adjustments to the content Z-Order.
  • There is no equivalent of the Acrobat Table Editor.
  • Seems to have no equivalent of Acrobat Preflight's many "Analyse & Fix options" which we find crucial in most PDF remediation.
  • Seems to only save as PDF 2.0. We need to be able to save as PDF 1.7 too.
  • Managing form fields is not as easy as with Acrobat.
  • Highlighting of text is a very thin (1 pixel?) blue rectangle. That's harder to see than the Acrobat method of shading, with the color being editable.
  • The need to manually switch from hand to arrow cursor for different actions is annoying. The Acrobat method is much better.
  • If it were acceptable to the agency as an Acrobat DC Pro replacement, it would be a significant cost savings.
  • Acrobat users would find transition to Power PDF Advanced a very bad experience.
My software experience background includes both PDF Converter Enterprise (versions up to 8) and Acrobat. I have tested other PDF editors. None were able to meet the accessibility editing capabilities of Acrobat. The "learning curve" for transitioning to Power PDF might be too great to gain acceptance even if features were identical.
The other products tested also failed to meet accessibility needs. Both other products had a better look and feel and were a better UX. I bought Power PDF hoping it had improved over version 2.0 in terms of editing for meeting accessibility standards.

Do you think Tungsten Power PDF delivers good value for the price?

No

Are you happy with Tungsten Power PDF's feature set?

No

Did Tungsten Power PDF live up to sales and marketing promises?

No

Did implementation of Tungsten Power PDF go as expected?

Yes

Would you buy Tungsten Power PDF again?

No

In-PDF editing with text reflow.
I could not recommend using for efficient PDF remediation and meeting PDF/UA-1 and WCAG 2.2. I could recommend using for producing clean PDFs from Microsoft Office files. I could not recommend based on GUI appearance. Acrobat and competitors such as Foxit are nicer to work with. I could not recommend based on intuitive use of the UI Ribbon/toolbar. Option locations do not seem intuitive.