This article was nominated for deletion on 21 April 2013 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.

This article was nominated for deletion on 25 May 2006. The result of the discussion was keep.

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Computing: Software Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Software (assessed as Low-importance).

Nitro PDF is an good alternative to Adobe Acrobat and Adobe Reader. Last version of Nitro PDF that runs under Windows Me is 4.91.] Wikinger 13:47, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

« Nitro PDF is an good alternative to Adobe Acrobat and Adobe Reader »

I'm afraid it's never been that good. Semi-decent support for form items (buttons, etc) began with the last of the 5.x revisions, none of which BTW could create bookmarks linking to a specific page-view. And now that the versions 6.x depend on the stupid dot NET framework, Nitro PDF is a big no-no. 189.62.49.216 (talk) 17:25, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, not only is that statement very advertisy. its untrue. Nitro PDF is unique for its own abilities in PDF and has features that Adobe doesnt have and vise versa. I use Nitro for its basic layout but it is buggy on large files. I think this line should be removed, becuase it is an opinion. It should read 'Nitro PDF is a PDF Editor similar to Adobe Acrobat'. Otherwise id remove the line. Mcris6 (talk) 23:48, 6 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The support team will provide the link on request, a special update is required to run 4.91 on Vista —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.206.204.219 (talk) 01:13, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nitro has come a long way since all of the above was written. I'm not an employee or dealer or anything like that; I have nothing to do with the company or its product, nor have any skin its its game. I'm simply both an end-user as well as an IT pro with pushing 40 years experience, and I've checked-out virtually every PDF product out there. In the past... oh... I dunno... I'd say maybe three or so years, Nitro PDF Pro has become a seriously worthy alternative to any full commercial version of Adobe Acrobat, and for a lot less money. And, like Acrobat, Nitro offers a best-of-breed freeware reader which, unlike Adobe's free reader, is capable of creating PDF files... and by three methods (specifying the file-to-be-made-into-a-PDF in the reader's interface, or dragging-'n-dropping it onto the reader's Windows desktop icon, or by "printing" to a virtual printer driver), to boot!

After trying the top four logical competitors for about three months each during 2013, I've come to the professional conclusion that Nitro PDF Pro is now the best alternative to pretty much any full version of Adobe Acrobat; and that Nitro's free reader is a far better default PDF reader on a person's Windows machine than is Adobe's free reader. Yes, of course, that's just my opinion, but it's my professional one, informed by nearly four decades of analyzing and reviewing and recommending such products (seriously; I go back to Acrobat version 1.0). I'm not saying Adobe Acrobat or its free reader is sub-standard; they are not: I still love those, too. I'm simply saying that Nitro has apparently been working overtime for the past three or so years to place itself at the unambiguously top of the heap, now, of Acrobat alternatives.

I hate that the article, now, contains misinformation (though I updated/corrected a little about the reader in it, today). I want to see if I can soon fix the problem rightly cited at the top of the article, which chides said article's not having third-party references. That's bad; and I hope to be able to fix that, over time, starting soon. There are plenty of articles and reviews out there, now, about Nitro; so it shouldn't be that hard! [grin]
Gregg L. DesElms (Username: Deselms) (talk) 00:57, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

the above sounds more like an advertisement that anything I've ever read on Wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.237.74.57 (talk) 19:09, 30 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Latest or Stable version of Nitro Pro needs updating to 13.38.1.739, April 6, 2021, as of April 13. Don't know why, but my attempt to do so, per reference #1, failed.24.123.84.22 (talk) 17:26, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest was declined.

I am an employee of Nitro Software and would like to request the removal of an inaccurate statement or its replacement with an accurate statement.

• What I think should be changed: "As of June 2025, Nitro Software is graded F by the Better Business Bureau for the company's failure to respond to customer complaints." is no longer correct as of July 2025 - verified by checking the cited source. Removal is preferred or, if unsatisfactory to the editor, please change the statement to "As of July 2025, Nitro Software is not rated by the Better Business Bureau."
• Why it should be changed: The statement is inaccurate.
• References supporting the possible change (format using the "cite" button): ^[1]

Thank you,

Wikiworld05 (talk) 21:44, 31 July 2025 (UTC)Wikiworld05[reply]

Not done: I found a WayBackMachine page with the F rating. Likeanechointheforest (talk) 13:20, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Likeanechointheforest How would you propose to edit so we can also show our current rating as of today as A-? Thank you for your help. https://www.bbb.org/us/ca/san-francisco/profile/computer-software-developers/nitro-software-inc-1116-136065 ~Wikiworld05 2605:A601:AFED:1800:51F8:F26B:56BD:C523 (talk) 21:16, 10 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly, it just looks like whitewashing to me, and unnecessary to keep updating the BBB rating on the Wiki page. That's what BBB is for. Wiki is an encyclopedia Likeanechointheforest (talk) 14:46, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see WP:COIRESPONSE. [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}|talk]] · [[Special:Contribs/{{{1}}}|contribs]]) has been paid by unknown.

The user below has a request that a significant addition or re-write be made to this article for which that user has an actual or apparent conflict of interest. The backlog is very high. Please be extremely patient. There are currently 522 requests waiting for review. Please read the instructions for the parameters used by this template for accepting and declining them, and review the request below and make the edit if it is well sourced, neutral, and follows other Wikipedia guidelines and policies.

I would like to request that this article be renamed from "Nitro Pro" to "Nitro Software."

Rationale: The article covers the company Nitro Software, Inc. broadly, including company history, products, and corporate information. The company's flagship PDF product has been renamed Nitro PDF Pro, and the company trades under the name Nitro Software, Inc. The current article title reflects an older product name and no longer accurately describes the scope of the article's content. No content changes are proposed in this request.

Source notes: No independent source required for a rename request. The rationale is structural. CPG2026 (talk) 14:39, 3 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]