This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------_=_NextPart_001_01C46361.A29A5A7E
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I subscribed to this developer list to monitor and hopefully contribute =
to getting my lame UMAX Astra 2100U working natively on Mac OS X. =
Apparently that will never happen. I then noticed lots of messages about =
Epsons, and other 'big name' scanner vendors. This got me to wonder. =
While the SANE project is a fascinating and honorable goal, is anyone =
selling the benefits of SANE to the scanner manufacturers?
My point is that this project will constantly have to be supported from =
people like myself who are irritated that their scanner doesn't work on =
different hardware/ OSes than what the maker originally intended (or =
cares about). However, if the SANE architecture is so much better than =
existing dominant TWAIN architecture, then someone should be pitching =
this story to the scanner manufacturers. If Epson, HP, UMAX, Dell, =
Primax, etc. agree to support this open source initiative (i.e, provide =
SANE backends), the hope is that their scanners will be better supported =
on more hardware, reaching more customers and improving satisfaction =
with EVERY customer. And, users can freely change front-end applications =
without worrying about loss of functionality. So it should be easier for =
the scanner manufacturers to change what application software is bundled =
with their scanner (photo scanner software, OCR software, etc.), =
avoiding their own issues with vendor lock-in.
Otherwise, the developers on the SANE project will always be writing =
backends for 'old' scanners. In effect, they will ALWAYS be playing =
catch-up with what already works on at least one OS and driver config.
The other option is to get the SANE architecture to be a standard on =
*nix boxes which means getting developers of the various *nix OSes to =
bundle pre-compiled SANE with their OS. CUPS (Common Unix Printing =
System) is the closest analogy I can think of. Printer makers that want =
printers to work with *nix systems build in support for CUPS because it =
is a *nix standard.
Again, are the project leaders of SANE considering these options? I =
don't see any 'official' support from the scanner makers which makes me =
wonder if SANE will ever be supported out-of-box.
Dave Paules
------_=_NextPart_001_01C46361.A29A5A7E
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META NAME=3D"Generator" CONTENT=3D"MS Exchange Server version =
6.5.6944.0">
<TITLE>discussion: Future of SANE-project</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<!-- Converted from text/rtf format -->
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">I subscribed to this developer list to =
monitor and hopefully contribute to getting my lame UMAX Astra 2100U =
working natively on Mac OS X. Apparently that will never happen. I then =
noticed lots of messages about Epsons, and other 'big name' scanner =
vendors. This got me to wonder. While the SANE project is a fascinating =
and honorable goal, is anyone selling the benefits of SANE to the =
scanner manufacturers?</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">My point is that this project will =
constantly have to be supported from people like myself who are =
irritated that their scanner doesn't work on different hardware/ OSes =
than what the maker originally intended (or cares about). However, if =
the SANE architecture is so much better than existing dominant TWAIN =
architecture, then someone should be pitching this story to the scanner =
manufacturers. If Epson, HP, UMAX, Dell, Primax, etc. agree to support =
this open source initiative (i.e, provide SANE backends), the hope is =
that their scanners will be better supported on more hardware, reaching =
more customers and improving satisfaction with EVERY customer. And, =
users can freely change front-end applications without worrying about =
loss of functionality. So it should be easier for the scanner =
manufacturers to change what application software is bundled with their =
scanner (photo scanner software, OCR software, etc.), avoiding their own =
issues with vendor lock-in.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">Otherwise, the developers on the SANE =
project will always be writing backends for 'old' scanners. In effect, =
they will ALWAYS be playing catch-up with what already works on at least =
one OS and driver config.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">The other option is to get the SANE =
architecture to be a standard on *nix boxes which means getting =
developers of the various *nix OSes to bundle pre-compiled SANE with =
their OS. CUPS (Common Unix Printing System) is the closest analogy I =
can think of. Printer makers that want printers to work with *nix =
systems build in support for CUPS because it is a *nix =
standard.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">Again, are the project leaders of SANE =
considering these options? I don't see any 'official' support from the =
scanner makers which makes me wonder if SANE will ever be supported =
out-of-box.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">Dave Paules</FONT>
</P>
</BODY>
</HTML>
------_=_NextPart_001_01C46361.A29A5A7E--
