[sane-devel] Sane is definately not Scanner Access Now Easy

Marc Gregoire marc.gregoire@student.kuleuven.ac.be
Thu, 21 Feb 2002 15:46:57 +0100

> Hi Henning
> ..cut
> > 
> > Maybe I got something wrong here but this is the story how I see it:
> > 
> > * You want to use a scanner made by a manufacturer who 
> doesn't provide
> >   drivers for your operating system
> > * the standard drivers that (most likely) come with your os 
> don't support your
> >   scanner (other operating systems don't even have scanner drivers
> >   shipped with them)
> > * someone wrote a driver for your scanner without beeing paid by you
> >   or the manufacturer of the scanner. He even lets you 
> access his development
> >   tree before the release is done and before it's in your 
> distribution's
> >   package system.
> > * you have quite a few questions about installation and 
> running. Quite
> >   some of them could have been solved by looking at the 
> documentation.
> >   Others result from compiling software on your own (and would have
> >   existed with any other package)
> > * About 10 people, quite some of them developers of the SANE system
> >   you use, try to help in several ways. These are not paid support
> >   people but the ones that actively use the code or even created it.
> > * Your scanner works now.
> > 
> > Probably tens or hundreds of hours have been spent to write a driver
> > *for you* (and others). Hours have been spent by people 
> trying to help
> > *you*.
> > 
> > And despite of all this you are constantly complaining 
> about SANE and
> > Linux.
> > 
> > I will never understand this.
> > 
> ...cut
> Yepp, great answer !
> Some poeple coming from $WinSucks dont even think about this 
> and maybe should
> stay with that OS and call these _very_ cheap hotlines after paying
> for a peace of hardware to get it running...

I definitly agree with Henning answer, but what you're saying is not
really beter than the rant of Fore. I find it a bit narrow-minded to say
$WinSucks. There're plenty of oses available and they should all deserve
a place. Even though you have to pay for Windows, it's still far easier
to install and operate by most people than Linux/Unix flavors. The
Windows kernel (NT,2K,XP ofcourse) has some advantages over Linux (eg:
better scheduling algorithms), but Linux also has some advantages over
Windows (eg: less hardware requirements).
Don't get me wrong, I'm not a Windows freak (I use several oses, Windows
XP, Linux (i386, Alpha), Dec, Sgi)

Marc Gregoire