Skip to main content
_
_AndrewLippett_
Participant
July 11, 2008
Question

Reader 9.0 AcroRd32.exe caused Microsoft Visual C++ Runtime Library error

  • July 11, 2008
  • 131 replies
  • 194996 views
A client has updated Adobe Reader 8.1 to 9.0 on several machines and now cannot use Adobe Reader.

The program start, the Adobe Reader window appears but no document and then an error message is displayed that says;

"Microsoft Visual C++ Runtime Library
Program: C:\Program Files\Adobe\Reader 9.0\Reader\AcroRd32.exe
This application has requested the runtime to terminate in an unusual
way.
Please contact the applications support team for mor information."

Adobe Reader has been removed, the computer restarted and then re-installed from a full installation package and the problem persists.

Does anyone have any ideas how to fix this?
    This topic has been closed for replies.

    131 replies

    Show previous replies
    _
    _crhosu_
    Participant
    March 17, 2009
    "They are doing that so when it does not work in the future there can be no call for action on the end users part."

    Exactly. Now that they have a disclaimer, we can't blame them for their incompetence. I'm sticking with 8 anywhere I have users with roaming profiles (most of my organization).
    _
    _Kuniyasu_
    Participant
    March 16, 2009
    Here is a suggestion.
    If you checked "Update Automatically"(I'm not sure what English vesion say, beacause I'm using Japanese version), do not check it.
    I think that Adeobe Reader V9.1 faild when it checks updates.
    At least, it fixed the problem in my case.
    _
    _James_Schlackman_
    Participating Frequently
    March 12, 2009
    It seems the future is now. Deploying Acrobat Pro 9.1 via GPO still exhibits the exact same problem on our systems. Not impressed.
    _
    _Stan_Gibson_
    Participant
    March 11, 2009
    They are doing that so when it does not work in the future there can be no call for action on the end users part.
    _
    _Ethan_Connor_
    Participating Frequently
    March 11, 2009
    Preliminary testing - clean install Acrobat Pro 9.0 from media, and immediately installing the 9.1.0 update prior to launching acrobat works for users with GP redirected App_Data folders.

    Similar Acrobat Reader 8.1.3 to 9.1 upgrade using GP application assignment and customized transform for our environment also worked, in the lab...

    ... Seems to work enough to warrant wide scale testing by those who have encountered the problem. Silly that it "is not supported" according to the release notes.
    _
    _Stan_Gibson_
    Participant
    March 11, 2009
    I have tested it in my environment and it seems to be working. I upgraded an group policy install of 8.1.2 to 9.1 using another group policy install with MSTs made with the customization wizard. Logging in as a user that has a redirected application data folder and launching the reader application does not throw the c++ error. Verified it was using the new version. Still prolimenary testing, but thus far seems like good news.....hope it lasts. If any one runs into any other conclusions please let me know.

    Thanks
    _
    _Ethan_Connor_
    Participating Frequently
    March 11, 2009
    I'll test it soon... But the release notes make me nervous:

    "Roaming Profiles on Windows and Networked Home Directory on Macintosh are not supported configurations for 9.0 or 9.1, however we have made several fixes in 9.1. We are looking at the possibility of supporting this for the next major release."
    A
    Anonymous
    March 11, 2009
    Does the update fix this issue?

    http://www.adobe.com/support/security/bulletins/apsb09-03.html
    _
    _Ethan_Connor_
    Participating Frequently
    February 20, 2009
    I'm not sure which is worse, having to wait for yet another version to see this issue fixed, or knowing full well that this is a trivial fix that they can easily throw into a security related rush job.
    ~graffiti
    ~graffiti
    Legend
    February 20, 2009
    > Maybe now that this has happened (see below) they will step it up a bit on 9.1.

    Maybe but, they may need to rush 9.1 out the door to deal with the security issue and not get some of the planned fixes done in time.

    Then we'll have to wait for 9.2.
    Show more replies
    Terms & ConditionsAccessibility statement
    Using the community Terms of use Privacy Cookie preferences Do not sell or share my personal information ad choicesAdChoices