A good value solution to the problem of PDF editing
July 21, 2021
A good value solution to the problem of PDF editing
Score 7 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User
Software Version
Power PDF Advanced
Overall Satisfaction with Kofax Power PDF (formerly Nuance)
Used daily as PDF reader and editor.
Users typically open all PDFs with Power PDF just for reading. Users frequently need to extract parts of PDFs, export to other programs (mostly MS Office) or erase/redact information.
Rarely do users use Power PDF to create documents from scratch. They prefer MS Office apps for creation. Power PDF is usually a PDF reader or their tool to manipulate an existing PDF.
Users typically open all PDFs with Power PDF just for reading. Users frequently need to extract parts of PDFs, export to other programs (mostly MS Office) or erase/redact information.
Rarely do users use Power PDF to create documents from scratch. They prefer MS Office apps for creation. Power PDF is usually a PDF reader or their tool to manipulate an existing PDF.
- Open PDF for reading.
- Extracting pages or sections of existing PDF.
- Converting PDFs to other formats.
- Erasing details or redacting sections of PDFs before distribution.
- The UI is poor.
- Users prefer other solutions that they find easier to learn.
- Users want a UI that is more compatible with MS Office apps.
- Conversions to other formats don't often product good results..
- Find a better way to manage licenses. And I do NOT mean a subscription model.
- Please drop the "Kofax". It's just Power PDF. No one cares about who/what Kofax is.
- Definitely a good "value" solution for users who need editing capabilities.
- Often a good alternative to Adobe Acrobat products.
- For teams with limited budgets, this is often the best solution.
The UI is not very intuitive. I have several users who have opted for other PDF editing tools specifically because of the user interface.
The UI is also very "old school" and not up to date with the current offerings from Adobe, Microsoft, Nitro and other makers of PDF editing products.
Once users have gotten used to Power PDF they seem to get along well with it, so that's mostly a learning curve issue.
The UI is also very "old school" and not up to date with the current offerings from Adobe, Microsoft, Nitro and other makers of PDF editing products.
Once users have gotten used to Power PDF they seem to get along well with it, so that's mostly a learning curve issue.
Basically, if users have the budget and can afford it, they all go with Adobe. It's the standard, works well, and what most people think of when they want to edit PDFs.
If they have a limited budget, they usually go with Nitro. They like the UI and find it more intuitive.
Most users with a small budget split between Power PDF and FoxitPhantom. They're about the same price and users don't particularly have a big preference.
If they have a limited budget, they usually go with Nitro. They like the UI and find it more intuitive.
Most users with a small budget split between Power PDF and FoxitPhantom. They're about the same price and users don't particularly have a big preference.
Do you think Tungsten Power PDF delivers good value for the price?
Yes
Are you happy with Tungsten Power PDF's feature set?
No
Did Tungsten Power PDF live up to sales and marketing promises?
Yes
Did implementation of Tungsten Power PDF go as expected?
Yes
Would you buy Tungsten Power PDF again?
Yes
For me and the users I manage, the answer to "which product features have proven most valuable to you" is this:
Power PDF is a good value solution to the problem of PDF editing. It's not the best, but for users on a budget and are willing to work through a little learning curve, it's a very good product.
As the purchaser and admin, it's can be deployed with little effort and most users accept that it's a good compromise.
Power PDF is a good value solution to the problem of PDF editing. It's not the best, but for users on a budget and are willing to work through a little learning curve, it's a very good product.
As the purchaser and admin, it's can be deployed with little effort and most users accept that it's a good compromise.