sharing a flatbed scanner in the same way you share a printer.

[Vernon Huff]

I thought I should pass this on: I had been told by microsoft that it is
not possible to network a scanner (ie, share a flatbed scanner between
users on a network in the way that printers are shared and networked),
but it turns out with some new 3rd party software called RemoteScan from
http://www.remote-scan.com it is now easy to do so.

Text from the article in PC Magazine where I found out about RemoteScan
sums things up nicely: "RemoteScan's new RemoteScan Server makes any
scanner a network scanner. Just install the server application on the
computer to which the scanner is attached. Now any computer running the
RemoteScan client can use the scanner over the network" --
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,4149,1537345,00.asp

I am not connected with the company, but I wanted to share this since
it was a HUGE frustation -- not being able to share scanners -- and the
software seems to be the only solution avialble today. Saved me and my
clients money (in that one scanner now meets the needs of an entire
office), you might like to try it out too.

Vernon H.
-Age not imoprtant.
-Sex more so.
-Race only matters if you win.
.....

 

[Papa]

This subject comes up frequently, and it always puzzles me as to why anyone
would want to do this, because the reality is:

1. The user must walk to where the scanner is located and insert the
original.
2. The user must then walk back to his/her computer desk and type in the
scanner commands.
3. The user must then do something with the scanned image, such as inserting
it into a Word document or saving it to a file.
4. The user must walk back to the scanner and retrieve the original.
5. Finally, the user must walk back to his/her computer desk.

Since the user has to walk over to the scanner anyway (to insert the
original), he/she might just as well perform the scanner commands with the
computer that is connected to that scanner - then save it to a shared
folder, retrieve the original, and walk back to his/her desk. Only one trip
to the scanner required!

Granted that you may have to wait if someone else is seated at the computer
for a non-networked scanner. But you would also have to wait anyway (to
insert the original) if another user was using a networked scanner.

 

[Shenan Stanley]

This subject comes up frequently, and it always puzzles me as to why
anyone would want to do this, because the reality is:

1. The user must walk to where the scanner is located and insert the
original.
2. The user must then walk back to his/her computer desk and type in
the scanner commands.
3. The user must then do something with the scanned image, such as
inserting it into a Word document or saving it to a file.
4. The user must walk back to the scanner and retrieve the original.
5. Finally, the user must walk back to his/her computer desk.

Since the user has to walk over to the scanner anyway (to insert the
original), he/she might just as well perform the scanner commands
with the computer that is connected to that scanner - then save it to
a shared folder, retrieve the original, and walk back to his/her
desk. Only one trip to the scanner required!

Granted that you may have to wait if someone else is seated at the
computer for a non-networked scanner. But you would also have to wait
anyway (to insert the original) if another user was using a networked
scanner.

You are correct, but this is what I see a lot..

User has an assistant that scans for them, but they come in on a day the
assistant is not.. They must scan themselves and either cannot use the
machine the scanner is hooked to (don't have rights) or they don't know they
can. It's easier to sometimes just share in this case.

Also, a lot of people have assistants (or student workers in my case) that
run things to and from the scanner in question. heh

 

[Robert]

It works if all the computers are in one room. I have a small office and my
officejet already supports this but it is a nice feature to have. It
doesn't limit one computer for that function only.

 

[*Vanguard*]

"Robert" said in news:uLt6c.11487$xg.6464@fed1read04:

It works if all the computers are in one room. I have a small office
and my officejet already supports this but it is a nice feature to
have. It doesn't limit one computer for that function only.

So instead of using the scan software on the host to which the scanner
is attached and sending the file across your network to where you want
to use that file, you scan from the same host where you intend to use
the file but need to use special software to do that. So instead of
pushing the file using standard TCP/IP protocols and shared directories,
you yank the file using proprietary software. Like the others, guess
I'm missing where the ease-of-use actually occurs. The push method
doesn't cost any money and is just as fast as the pull method that
requires buying more software. If you aren't the one that has to
install the proprietary software (both the server and client programs)
on multiple hosts and you aren't the one that has to pay for it then,
yes, there might be a perceived ease-of-use only in a rather tightly
spaced multiple host environment. But someone had to install the server
and client programs for that software that provides its own proprietary
protocol and someone had to pay for it. Plus it add more software
between you and the scanner to reduce liability and, of course, we all
know that to generate continued revenue that there will be upgrades
later.

 

[Colon Terminus]

Wow! What a cool idea.

How is it that mere people can be so ****ing stupid?

Network scanning ... the dumbest idea I've ever heard of.

 

[D.Currie]

"Robert" said in news:uLt6c.11487$xg.6464@fed1read04:

So instead of using the scan software on the host to which the scanner
is attached and sending the file across your network to where you want
to use that file, you scan from the same host where you intend to use
the file but need to use special software to do that. So instead of
pushing the file using standard TCP/IP protocols and shared directories,
you yank the file using proprietary software. Like the others, guess
I'm missing where the ease-of-use actually occurs. The push method
doesn't cost any money and is just as fast as the pull method that
requires buying more software. If you aren't the one that has to
install the proprietary software (both the server and client programs)
on multiple hosts and you aren't the one that has to pay for it then,
yes, there might be a perceived ease-of-use only in a rather tightly
spaced multiple host environment. But someone had to install the server
and client programs for that software that provides its own proprietary
protocol and someone had to pay for it. Plus it add more software
between you and the scanner to reduce liability and, of course, we all
know that to generate continued revenue that there will be upgrades
later.

I can imagine a few (very few) scenarios where sharing a scanner would make
sense. A school media center, for example, where someone would be monitoring
what the students were scanning.

But otherwise, you have to GO to the scanner to put in whatever you want
scanned. Going back to your computer to work the software seems silly. And
in the meantime, a co-worker puts their own photo in the scanner, you press
scan, get their photo...it just sounds unwieldy. The fights would be worse
than the ones over who took the last of the coffee and should brew another
pot.

And consider that many scanners have a "scan" button. It would be pretty
simple to set up the scanner to send the scans to a common network folder.
You go to the scanner, put the photo in, press scan, remove the photo. And
when you get back to your computer, you retrieve the scan from the network
folder.

And that scenario would work just as well in the media center example. The
scanner person scans the photo or whatever, then hands the photo back
immediately. Either there's a shared folder, or the media center worker
sends the file to the student's computer.

 

[techno]

First, I wonder why this thread was posted to 7 newsgroups?

Wow! What a cool idea.

How is it that mere people can be so ****ing stupid?

An inferiority complex for sure. I think you should take your pills
and find a different hobby.

Far, far, far away from human contact.

 

[Mike Brown - Process Manager]

I thought I should pass this on: I had been told by microsoft that it is
not possible to network a scanner (ie, share a flatbed scanner between
users on a network in the way that printers are shared and networked),
but it turns out with some new 3rd party software called RemoteScan from
http://www.remote-scan.com it is now easy to do so.

Or you could buy a scanner that has network support, like the Network
Scanjet.

 

[Gadget Guy Bob]

The advantage of using RemoteScan is:
1) It is a software solution that works with all scanners, not just
scanners that are already network enabled.

2) Is much less expensive than buying a hardware scanner.

There are very clear reasons why sharing a scanner on a network makes
a lot of sense. The reasons wont make sense to anyone who works alone
on their own computer, but for anyone who shares office space and
resources, sharing a scanner is a good thing. Just as now it is 2nd
nature to share printers.

When you have a scanner that is not shared, anytime anyone needs to
use it, they have to take over the use of the computer where the
scanner is attached. By networking a scanner, anyone can use the
scanner without having to dedicate a single computer just to scanning.
By locating the scanner on a counter or table where it is near to
several office works (exactly as printers are located in offices), a
person would place their document in the scanner and then use their
own computer and their own software applications and acquire the image
directly into their application.

Also, if you are in a large scale, industrial environment where
Terminal Services are in use, RemoteScan seems to be the only
non-hardware solution that allows software running on the Terminal
Server to use scanners attached to client machines.

All the posts above blasting the "idea" of sharing scanners as lame
are clearly coming from people who are so anti-social they have never
been able to hold a job in an environment where it is necessary to
work with others; thus to them the idea of "sharing" is as foreign as
"networking." Lurkers don't need to share, just as they don't really
need to worry about saving time or money, as insulting appears to be
their commodity that allows them to subsist ad infinitum.

For anyone else, I suggest if you need to network your scanner, you
check out the cool new software from http://www.remote-scan.com

GadetGuy.

 

[Gadget Guy Bob]

The advantage of using RemoteScan is:
1) It is a software solution that works with all scanners, not just
scanners that are already network enabled.

2) Is much less expensive than buying a hardware scanner.

There are very clear reasons why sharing a scanner on a network makes
a lot of sense. The reasons wont make sense to anyone who works alone
on their own computer, but for anyone who shares office space and
resources, sharing a scanner is a good thing. Just as now it is 2nd
nature to share printers.

When you have a scanner that is not shared, anytime anyone needs to
use it, they have to take over the use of the computer where the
scanner is attached. By networking a scanner, anyone can use the
scanner without having to dedicate a single computer just to scanning.
By locating the scanner on a counter or table where it is near to
several office workers (exactly as printers are located in offices), a
person would place their document in the scanner and then use their
own computer and their own software applications and acquire the image
directly into their application.

Also, if you are in a large scale, industrial environment where
Terminal Services are in use, RemoteScan seems to be the only
non-hardware solution that allows software running on the Terminal
Server to use scanners attached to client machines.

All the posts above blasting the "idea" of sharing scanners as lame
are clearly coming from people who are so anti-social they have never
been able to hold a job in an environment where it is necessary to
work with others; thus to them the idea of "sharing" is as foreign as
"networking." Lurkers don't need to share, just as they don't really
need to worry about saving time or money, as insulting appears to be
their commodity that allows them to subsist ad infinitum.

For anyone else, I suggest if you need to network your scanner, you
check out the cool new software from http://www.remote-scan.com

GadetGuy.

 

[Papa]

Not to flame you, but just a friendly comment for your consideration:
name-calling ("so anti-social they have never been able to hold a job",
"insulting appears to be their commodity") does nothing to enhance a
discussion. That is the same mistake many politicians make. Winning a debate
is usually accomplished by just sticking to the pertinent points.

Actually there are very good reasons for NOT networking a scanner - see my
original post. I have spent a significant number of years in an office
environment employing large numbers of desk top computers. We have found
that it is really not cost-effective to network them, and the scanner
manufacturers - for the most part - have recognized that fact and have
therefore not incorporated network capability into their designs.

Best regards.

Oops, almost forgot. You can minimize incoming spam by not using your real
email address in newsgroup posts.

 

[Vance Green]

Wow.

You're never gonna sell any of your stuff
with this kinda attitude. (don't try to pretend
you don't work for Remote-whatever)

If the sock puppet who put up the
original post had just admitted he worked for the
company he purports NOT to, instead of lying to us,
we might have been kinder, or at least just
ignored him.

And developers who REALLY feel that their product
is valuable do NOT resort to name calling when flaws
in said product or purpose of said product are brought up...

they ADDRESS those issues in a sane and reasonable way,
and incorporate the feedback.

 

[Papa]

I checked about a dozen newsgroups. The only posts this guy has ever made is
about scanners. Guess what that tells us?

Regards.

 

[*Vanguard*]

"D.Currie" said in

The fights would be worse than the ones over who took the last of the
coffee and should brew another pot.

Actually we go on hunting parties to find out who to embarass that
didn't start the next batch of coffee. Coffee is the elixir of life.
Other than aspirin (to let us keep going), coffee makes us go (in more
ways than one). No other drugs are allowed onsite. We MUST have our
coffee!!! Never EVER take the last cup without starting the next pot.
Soon we will be mounting trophy heads of those that disobey.

 

[*Vanguard*]

"Gadget Guy Bob" said in

All the posts above blasting the "idea" of sharing scanners as lame
are clearly coming from people who are so anti-social they have never
been able to hold a job in an environment where it is necessary to
work with others; thus to them the idea of "sharing" is as foreign as
"networking."

Boy, talk about limited working experience. Must be a guy that works in
a regional insurance office comprised of a single room with desks piled
up against the walls. I work in Quality Assurance. We share
EVERYTHING, mostly because we have to borrow much, even people when we
finagle the manpower. 600 employees, a computer tech computer company,
$7M in just our part of our alpha lab, and yet no one has been screaming
for a networked scanner. Wonder why.

How long have you used this scanner "solution"? How many must share the
solution? What happens when multiple people want to use it? That is
how is prioritization handled amongst people standing in a line? Boss
goes first or whomever would have the most impact on generating revenue?

This RemoteScan is a software solution. There is no network attached
hardware for that connects the scanner, like a JetDirect for printers or
NAS (network access storage; i.e., hard drives on a NIC). You still
need to install the "server" program on a host that has to be left
running all the time. If that host is turned off, rebooted (for
updates), or crashes then no one is going to be using that scanner until
the host is brought back up. So what did it solve? You still have the
scanner attached to a host. You really need more software to route it
to a client host somewhere else when you can do that right from the
scanner or the software that came with it that got installed on that
scanner's host. To eliminate annoyance from everyone else trying to use
one employee's PC to do scans, are you really going to waste the money
for a dedicated host on which to run the RemoteScan server?

If this was such a great idea, why is it only now that this non-solution
has finally arrived? Because someone figured marketing hype could
overpower logic and rake in some money for awhile, and that there are
lots more dummies than there are users that understand their scanner
software, networking, and shared resources. This is a solution in
search of a problem - and hoping you don't already realize the solution
already exists!

You asked if the community finds value in this "solution." The
consensus is no. Other solutions already exist and this one isn't
innovative beyond those existing solutions. I can share a scanner NOW
over the network using the scanner software and TCP, NetBEUI, or
Computer Browser to shared directories. It's connected to a host
computer just as would be your Remote-Scan "solution". The user decides
where to push the scan file rather than having to double up their hiking
back and forth (my solution = walk to scanner, scan, hike back to desk;
your solution = walk to scanner, insert doc and scan, walk back to desk,
use client program to pull the scan file, walk back to scanner to
retrieve document, hike back to desk). Maybe RemoteScan's server lets
you push to its client program that must be running on a client host so
you really don't have all that extra hiking, but neither do you have any
less hiking, so there's no benefit.

And when you read their Uses web page and see them trying to usurp the
benefits of wireless networks as their benefit then you know they are
desparate to prove their product. The benefits of WiFi are the benefits
provided by the wireless NICs and hubs, NOT by some software that
happens to run on those WiFi hosts! Using the same illogic, RemoteScan
could also claim it makes Windows usable simply because RemoteScan is
installed under Windows. It's really cost effective to put a scanner in
some public access cubicle that has to have a dedicated PC to run its
server program? Guess that is a small-sized but extreme scanner use
environment that I've never seen. Hey, it could hawpen, sure, yubetcha.

 

[D.Currie]

"D.Currie" said in

Actually we go on hunting parties to find out who to embarass that
didn't start the next batch of coffee. Coffee is the elixir of life.
Other than aspirin (to let us keep going), coffee makes us go (in more
ways than one). No other drugs are allowed onsite. We MUST have our
coffee!!! Never EVER take the last cup without starting the next pot.
Soon we will be mounting trophy heads of those that disobey.

Heh. One place I worked, one woman somehow managed to always end up making
coffee. I think she must have timed it that way. She'd stop by my desk and
spend 15 minutes complaining about how she had no time to make coffee
because she was so busy.

 

[Richard G. Harper]

If you google this guy you will find out that the only messages he has ever
posted are about this scanner sharing "solution". I suspect (but cannot
prove) that he is somehow connected to the company hawking the software.

'nuff said.

 

[David Vanug]

Not sure why this long-winded rant was here, but thanks! It led me to
this thread.

I actually *had* been trying to figure out a way to connect our
scanners to the network for a long time (sharing a folder is not an
option, and we had an investment in application software), so I just
want to say that RemoteScan works fine, it does exactly what it claims
to.

I also looked through their site and can't see where they claim
anything extraordinary other than just being a clean and simple driver
for sharing scanners, which, again, is exactly what I was looking for,
because that was exactly what I needed.

Seems like someone has an dull ax to grind..... ;~}

 

[*Vanguard*]

"David Vanug" said in

Not sure why this long-winded rant was here, but thanks! It led me to
this thread.

Seems like someone has an dull ax to grind..... ;~}

No, it's really like "Why do we need another door here alongside this
door that is already here?"

If you cannot figure out how to produce a solution using the network,
shared resources, and the scanner software but instead want something to
layer atop all that which makes it easier for you then, great, go for
it. Some folks buy extravagant HTML editors that color highlight and
syntax check when they write HTML pages instead of just using Notepad
when all you want to produce is a simple web page. If you don't have
the expertise then buy someone else's.