Page 1 of 1

Quandry

Posted: Sun Jan 01, 2006 9:56 am
by mntbighker
A couple of hours here and on Google and I am faced with a dilemma. I just purchased a Microtek i900 which has a very nice glassless film scan tray and bundles SF AI6. The problem is that Microotek barely seems to acknowledge the Mac exists and who knows if they will ever offer TWAIN support. Epson appears to be the only company that went the TWAIN route, which seems to me to be the "integrated" route. But the scanners in that price/performance range are not what I would choose normally. The SANE stuff does not support any of these either yet. The consequence of all this is no ability to use the scanner with Graphic Convertor, iPhoto.app, Image Capture.app or Acrobat. Microtek does not even support their OCR product with the Mac. The whole scanner situation with OSX is a mine field and Lasersoft NOT offering TWAIN either (even for Epson) is not helping the situation.

Posted: Mon Jan 02, 2006 12:14 am
by RAG
mntbighker,

I know this might sound silly, but you could purchase an inexpensive PC to use as a scan workstation if you really like and want to use you i900. (Best of both worlds) :)

MS Free

Posted: Mon Jan 02, 2006 9:37 am
by mntbighker
RAG wrote:mntbighker,

I know this might sound silly, but you could purchase an inexpensive PC to use as a scan workstation if you really like and want to use you i900. (Best of both worlds) :)

That would be a perfectly acceptable solution if SANE supported the i900 and had the required tools available. My house is a Microsloth Free zone.

Posted: Mon Jan 02, 2006 5:59 pm
by RAG
Well,

Short of that I'd say put the screws to Microtek! They probably are trying to recover expenses before paying any royalties to Apple computer for being able to make their product compatible for all I know.

Band together and beat down their (Microtek's) doors!!! :wink:

Why Microtek?

Posted: Mon Jan 02, 2006 7:27 pm
by mntbighker
RAG wrote:Well,

Short of that I'd say put the screws to Microtek! They probably are trying to recover expenses before paying any royalties to Apple computer for being able to make their product compatible for all I know.

Band together and beat down their (Microtek's) doors!!! :wink:

I am a bit baffled why your first thought would be Microtek for a TWAIN driver. Lasersoft seems like the like more likely target for a campaign considering what they charge for their products. If Lasersoft offered TWAIN versions of their drivers the hardware selection whould be much less dependant on the mfg for drivers that do what they should. Not that I don't also think they should all have to offer TWAIN in order to call themselves Mac compatible.

Posted: Mon Jan 02, 2006 7:31 pm
by RAG
Ah,

It is my understanding the TWAIN driver comes from the hardware manufacturer and not LaserSoft.

Posted: Mon Jan 02, 2006 7:55 pm
by mntbighker
RAG wrote:Ah,

It is my understanding the TWAIN driver comes from the hardware manufacturer and not LaserSoft.

Back in OS9 era Silverfast was a TWAIN/Photoshop plugin. OSX had no stable TWAIN standard until fairly recently. In spite of that fact Epson stepped up and went the TWAIN route anyway. I assume this meant they had to re-write a lot of code as the standard matured, but they did it anyway. Eveyone else including Lasersoft opted to stay away from TWAIN either because they lack the intimacy with Apple to achieve it or more likely it was just easier not to. Someone correct me if this is an incorrect assumption. It was a very nice experience when I was able to plug my old cheap Epson flatbed into my Mac without even installing a driver and have Image Capture and iPhoto "just work". That was the magic of a company that buys into integration the way Apple intends it to be.

Posted: Mon Jan 02, 2006 8:07 pm
by RAG
I'm not sure about Mac's, but in the PC world the various hardware manufactures provide their drivers and application developers hook into the drivers via API?s/DLL?s Vs writing their own. In the "Microsloft" (as it was put to me) world some of the drivers are included with the OS while others are provided according to the OS specification by the hardware manufactures.

I suppose I need to ask LaserSoft if they still write independent drivers, which was something I thought had stopped when MS introduced the Hardware Access Layer (HAL).