Bill Deville
Downloads: 0
Posts: 16
Smile Score: +16
About Me
I am a Free member
Gender: Male


Visit Stats
Last Visit: 56 days ago
Member Since: 23 Dec 2007
Profile Views: 1,884

Bill Deville's Posts
Average Rating from Bill:
(2)

sort: smiles | time
burypromote
+7

Billd reviewed on 14 Nov 2009
I've been using a ScanSnap for 4 years now, and it has been a delight. I've run thousands of pages through it, most of them for OCR in DEVONthink Pro Office. I have never had a hardware failure, so I've got to say the ScanSnap is rugged and holds up well. Image quality has been very satisfactory for OCR.

Scanning speed is very good, even with my first-generation Mac version of the ScanSnap. Much of my copy is two-sided and duplex scanning effectively doubles output speed. The software ignores blank pages if the copy is single-sided, so no user action is required.

From time to time I've used most of the options in ScanSnap Manager Settings. I find them useful and easy to adapt to the copy I'm working with.

For example, paper that has been previously stapled or folded may tend to misfeed in the document feeder. Theres a Settings option to allow page at a time loading mixed with stack feeding, which compiles the output to a single PDF when the 'Finish' button on the computer screen display is clicked. This also allows one to intersperse pages of differing sizes into the same PDF.

I'm puzzled by the negative comments by another user about the ScanSnap's ability to adapt to various sizes of paper copy. I routinely scan a variety of paper documents with different sizes, and everything works simply and reliably. Just adjust the sliding plastic width indicators in the feeder and insert the copy in portrait mode. Checks, business cards, postcards, whatever, up to the maximum width of the document feeder. Comment: I've owned a PaperPort scanner in the past, and I think the ScanSnap is head and shoulders better both in hardware and software execution.

I've also got a flatbed scanner to handle scanning of bound copy such as books and journals. I regard it as a necessity, but I hate to do scanning in that mode, as it is so much slower and feels like drudgery, compared to the ScanSnap.
[Version 3.0.20]



burypromote
+1
BillD (developer) commented on 10 Sep 2007
System-wide contextual menu plugins are more tricky than most people recognize. There are too many bad ones out there already.

I don't have enough fingers on my hands (10) to tick off the number of contextual menu plugins I've had to remove from my computers to eliminate errors they caused.

Contextual menus are included in future plans for DEVONthink, but only if they prove 'clean' enough to avoid creating system errors.

Disclaimer: I'm the Evangelist for DEVONtechnologies.
[Version 1.3.2]



burypromote

BillD reviewed on 19 Sep 2006
Papyrus gets 5 stars from me because it does two things no other word processor does for me, and both things meet my needs.

[1] It's the first powerful word processor that produces editable output fully compatible with my DEVONthink Pro databases. Not only is the text of those Papyrus documents fully searchable and analyzable, the layout including footnotes, endnotes, images, spreadsheet tables, etc. is viewed in my databases exactly as in Papyrus. And that includes working hyperlinks for URLs, mail addresses and internal 'bookmark' hyperlinks.

From my DEVONthink Pro database I can select such a document, click a button to open it under Papyrus, then edit and save it. The changes are then visible in my database next time I look at the document. And I'm looking at the actual document including images, footnotes, full layout, everything.

I can't do that with Word, Mellel, Pages or any other word processor above the level of TextEdit.

That's because Papyrus 12 for Mac OS X can produce editable PDFs. Fully, absolutely, completely editable PDFs saved with the "pap.pdf" suffix. That's a WOW! feature, and the reason I bought Papyrus 12.

[2] I'm doing a project that results in lots of PDFs. Those files are reviewed by several people who often request changes. In the past, I've had to do the dreaded two-step. I've had to find and open the original document created under another application, edit and save it, then create a PDF version of the changed file. No more. Now I just open the PDF generated by Papyrus, make changes and save the file. That's it. No second step required, no duplication of material on the drive.

Perhaps you won't understand why I appreciate that one-step edit/save process until you are faced with managing dozens of PDFs that have a number of requests for changes.

Summary: For my needs Papyrus 12 is wonderful. For those who need to include powerful spreadsheet table elements within a document (which can read data from other files as well), it's very good. For those who need very large documents, with the capability of generating a linked table of contents, it works well. For those who might need complete compatibility with MS Word documents, it's not that great, but can capture the text of Word documents.

For those who need fully editable PDFs produced by a capable word processor, there's nothing like Papyrus.

The developers note that Papyrus may be able to open "normal" PDFs in the future. As I work with a lot of OCR'd PDFs, I hope that would let me correct OCR errors.
[Version 12.20]



There are currently no troubleshooting comments by this member.

Displaying 1-3 of 3
Please login or create a new
MacUpdate Member account
to use this feature


- -