At 5/22/2000 08:09 PM -0700, you wrote: >If you end up getting a new scanner, think very hard about >getting a USB or SCSI scanner for the new one if you computer >has the proper ports. The ScanJet 5p was good for its day, but >is a bit long in the tooth for new computers. > >Jack I just got a new scanner. My old sheet fed one finally quit feeding. <g> I now have an Acer 640U flatbed. I had to install a USB card in my system for it, and it was a disaster!!! Had hardware conflicts all over the place. With some help, I straightened out all but one, but I don't use that port anyway, so it could wait. Anyway, even though I haven't had much time to work with the new scanner, I did get to play for a while one evening. So far, I like it! Has anyone had an experience with the Acer scanners? My computer is an Acer, and I've had pretty good luck with it - easy to upgrade. Right now, about the only "original equipment" left is the motherboard, floppy drive and video card. <vbg> Sandra Walroth SW Pa [email protected] Carawind Australian Shepherds and Shetland Sheepdogs http://freepages.pets.rootsweb.com/~carawind/ WCOTC: http://www.geocities.com/Petsburgh/1181 GLASC: http://www.geocities.com/Petsburgh/1806

At 06:58 PM 05/26/2000, Sandy wrote: *************START OF ORIGINAL MESSAGE TEXT************* At 5/22/2000 08:09 PM -0700, you wrote: >If you end up getting a new scanner, think very hard about >getting a USB or SCSI scanner for the new one if you computer >has the proper ports. The ScanJet 5p was good for its day, but >is a bit long in the tooth for new computers. > >Jack I just got a new scanner. My old sheet fed one finally quit feeding. <g> I now have an Acer 640U flatbed. I had to install a USB card in my system for it, and it was a disaster!!! Had hardware conflicts all over the place. With some help, I straightened out all but one, but I don't use that port anyway, so it could wait. Anyway, even though I haven't had much time to work with the new scanner, I did get to play for a while one evening. So far, I like it! Has anyone had an experience with the Acer scanners? My computer is an Acer, and I've had pretty good luck with it - easy to upgrade. Right now, about the only "original equipment" left is the motherboard, floppy drive and video card. <vbg> Sandra Walroth SW Pa [email protected] **************END OF ORIGINAL MESSAGE TEXT************** Haven't used an Acer, or known anyone who did. My scanner is an ImageReader from InfoTech, one that my bought from the Home Shopping Network about 3 years ago for $79.95. Yes, back when a "good" scanner cost at least $150.00 and most were even higher. It will scan up to 1200 dpi (interpolated), and up to 720 dpi "real". I couldn't, and still can't, believe the quality for $79.95! The software that came with it is fabulous, and my scans turn out very professional looking. I have scanned actual photos we took, "tweaked" them a bit in Paint Shop Pro, and then printed them on glossy photo paper. They look almost identical with the original photos, except they are BETTER! So much for buying a "cheap" scanner. In PSP, I just click on the scanner icon and away we go! SgtGeorge

At 06:58 PM 5/26/00 -0400, you wrote: >At 5/22/2000 08:09 PM -0700, you wrote: > >If you end up getting a new scanner, think very hard about > >getting a USB or SCSI scanner for the new one if you computer > >has the proper ports. The ScanJet 5p was good for its day, but > >is a bit long in the tooth for new computers. > > > >Jack > >I just got a new scanner. My old sheet fed one finally quit feeding. <g> > >I now have an Acer 640U flatbed. I had to install a USB card in my system >for it, and it was a disaster!!! Had hardware conflicts all over the >place. With some help, I straightened out all but one, but I don't use >that port anyway, so it could wait. > >Anyway, even though I haven't had much time to work with the new scanner, >I did get to play for a while one evening. So far, I like it! Has anyone >had an experience with the Acer scanners? My computer is an Acer, and >I've had pretty good luck with it - easy to upgrade. Right now, about >the only "original equipment" left is the motherboard, floppy drive and >video card. <vbg> Just got home, so will put in a minute or so for another of my rants. The manufactures of all parts have to follow some rules for their parts to work within the larger group of computers using DOS based Operating Systems of which, one is Windows. All the rest were run out of business or bought out. At the core of the machines is two very important functions. Basic input and output functions and a basic machine language bit of code which uses the bios functions to call up bits of code for the machine to use. When DOS was generated, it was a super set of an earlier op sys. Most of our present users are too young to remember it or it's basic reliance of earlier code. This goes all the way to the original machine code. We had to punch that in with push button switches, no tape, disk, or other input other than punched paper cards. Now what is that all about. As the systems got more complex, the general group of users wanted the machines to do more. This is just basic human greed in a good way. When Intel more or less began to get the basics for the parts standardized, we used 8 bit processors rather than 64 or 128 bit. From this it was assumed that we only needed a small number of IRQ's and DMA channels to more than use any code we would use. Now the real world has come on full force in less than 20 years, and our desktop machines are better than super computers of 4 or 5 years ago, but we are still saddled with the very few number of IRQ and DMA calls available in the hardware. We needed them for the drives we use, whether floppy, hard disk, CDRom, or DVD. We need them for the mouse, for the keyboard. Well you can see where I am heading, and know that there are not enough to go around. The newer OP SYS's like Win98 and to a degree W95 along with newer hardware was to let us do Plug and Play, where the old method of assigning a IRQ or DMA to a particular item, was no longer needed, as the sys would use the new hardware to do it for us. This has not arrived yet. Not all the P&P parts follow the Standards, and the Win98 code does not either. Some day, perhaps it will. This is mainly needed due the so called Intel architecture within the hardware. To get around the built in problems of basing all needs on 20 years old standards, a whole group of other manufacturers have made or designed newer chips and code to work better and bypass all the built in problems of DOS machines. OK enough History. This is the basic problem why we have problems with Scanners, and all most any external additions to the computers, as well as a few of the interior parts. When we have the problems, we have to find work around methods to make it work. This frequently requires changes in the bios, and making hard choices as just what the machine will work with totally. This requires some old hard head like me, close to you which can more or less tear the setup apart, and find a way to rearrange it to make it work. If you are not using some serial ports, for instance, you can borrow their IRQ's. It takes knowledge, time, and patiences to find answers. I really feel for those who do not have the luck to have some person close to work out the problems. An in all too many cases, there is no answer, and some part or item we think we need has to be removed before the new can be made to work. If we all could afford the newer, higher cost, but well thought out parts, we could do a lot more. Jack P.S. If this is just too much for all for me to run off at the mouth, say so and I will stop, and try as time permits to talk to people one to one to help if I think I can. It is necessary however for our machines to work correctly if we are to use programs such as Eudora, which can do so much for us. I go through about 500 e-mails each day, for work, and Genealogy, with a large side order of Digital Photography used in Genealogy for this, I have to have a good e-mail program, and a machine which works right, so I have been forced to learn what I do know, but I only think of myself as an advanced amateur compared to those who use to work for me.