Re: Megascanner drivers (was Re: Options arising fromscanner tech...)

From: Ed Kennedy <ekennedyx_at_yahoo_dot_com>
Date: Sat May 07 2005 - 21:42:31 CDT

Hello:

What are they using to scan checks, a dedicated machine? Also, what does
the IRS use to scan returns? Jim Bohorquez of Mesa Power told me that he
had worked up something special for the IRS when he worked for IBM. I'm
copying him to see if he has any input.

-- 
Thanks, Edmund R. Kennedy
Always work for the common good.
10777 Bendigo Cove
San Diego, CA 92126-2510
USA
I blog now and then at: <http://ekennedyx.blogspot.com/>
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jim March" <jmarch@prodigy.net>
To: "Open Voting Consortium discussion list" <ovc-discuss@listman.sonic.net>
Sent: Saturday, May 07, 2005 11:19 AM
Subject: Re: Megascanner drivers (was Re: [OVC-discuss] Options arising 
fromscanner tech...)
> Edward Cherlin wrote:
>
> <sniiiipage>
>
>>Here is the one high-speed scanner listed at
>>http://www.scanstore.com/scanning/document_imaging/peripherals/scanners/adf/ADF_Scanner.asp
>>"KV-S2065L 62ppm B&W Duplex 8.5x14" - KV-S2065L
>>Panasonic KV-S2065L 62ppm B&W Duplex 8.5x14" Specs $5525"
>>
>>for which SANE lists Linux drivers.
>>"KV-S2065L SCSI good" (meaning good but not complete support)
>>
>>Specs
>>http://www.panasonic.com/office/templates/PDIC_BuyNow.asp?Category=1063&ModelNo=kv-s2065l
>>300 page feeder
>>daily duty cycle 8800 pages
>>
>>62 ppm is nominally 3720 pph.
>>
>
> <snip>
>
> Sorry Ed, you missed something.
>
> It's 62ppm *duplex*.  That means only 31ppm single-sided.
>
> The Canon is 3x faster for only $300 more - 90ppm single-sided, 180ppm 
> duplex.  Again, what's happening here is that the mechanical paper 
> handling is the hard part, the actually scanning is easy, so they quote 
> ppm rates in "duplex" to make it sound faster (classic marketing).  And 
> the Canon paper hopper is bigger (at least 500 sheets vs. 300 and to be 
> honest I wish 1,000 was available at a good price point).  Finally, the 
> Panasonic you mention does paper to legal size (8.5x14) where the Canon 
> can hit 11x17 (and I can think of at least one potential application for 
> that).
>
> Like I said, the Canon is a hell of a deal if we can sort out the drivers.
>
> Another point on that: Canon execs must be aware of the "controversy" 
> surrounding US voting systems, at least the US side managers and word of 
> the issue has probably gotten to Japan by now.  Canon might like the PR 
> benefits of being tied to a "white hat solution" and hence help out with 
> driver R&D - esp. since the same R&D gives them the Linux market...
>
> -----------------------
>
> Sidenote on software design: we could set it up to scan both sides, throw 
> out blank sides in software while counting the number of same, and as long 
> as the number of discarded blanks equals the number of data-rich sheets we 
> know there wasn't a jam or anything AND we can work with ballots that were 
> stuck in upside-down, rightside-up, maybe even backwards if we're clever 
> enough and have an "orientation symbol" somewhere to reference.  Now the 
> county elections staff can cram 'em in there any ol' way!  :)
>
>
> Jim
> _______________________________________________
> OVC discuss mailing lists
> Send requests to subscribe or unsubscribe to 
> arthur@openvotingconsortium.org 
_______________________________________________
OVC discuss mailing lists
Send requests to subscribe or unsubscribe to arthur@openvotingconsortium.org
==================================================================
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external 
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain    
==================================================================
Received on Tue May 31 23:17:24 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue May 31 2005 - 23:17:52 CDT