This post was published in 2022-07-06. Obviously, expired content is less useful to users if it has already pasted its expiration date.
不同PDF查看器对PDF文件的渲染细节对比
使用同一个PDF文件:https://truxton2blog.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/20220709_010554_AMOnc.pdf,这个PDF文件本质上是一个特别特别长的图片文件。
测试时间:2022-07-10;测试平台:macOS Monterey 12.4
Chrome:
![](https://truxton2blog.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/20220710_072046_NsJnX-300x134.png)
Edge:
![](https://truxton2blog.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/20220710_072331_zMdKY-300x128.png)
Safari :
![](https://truxton2blog.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/20220710_072138_YMtVy-300x140.png)
Firefox(应该是使用了pdf.js 2.x) :
![](https://truxton2blog.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/20220710_072159_QlA5k-300x134.png)
Adobe acrobat pro :
![](https://truxton2blog.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/20220710_072719_VbJZ7-300x133.png)
macOS preview.app :
![](https://truxton2blog.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/20220710_072807_nKgNu-300x133.png)
macOS PDF expert:
![](https://truxton2blog.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/20220725_152533_265um-300x132.png)
结论:
(主观层面上)preview.app效果最好;acrobat效果最差;PDF.js最模糊。本站将继续使用PDF.js。
2022-10-31更新,在macOS Ventura平台上测试pdf.js 3.0.279:
pdf.js 3.0.279:
![](https://truxton2blog.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/20221031_014151_ZUlop-300x154.png)
Last Modified in 2022-10-31