Re: Doubt - Can a scanner be faster on Windows 98 than on Linux?

David Nelson (
Sun, 17 Oct 1999 10:09:41 -0500 (CDT)


Sounds to me like that there is a small buffer in the device driver
(scsi/pp/etc) or the reading process (SANE backend) is requesting little
chunks of data. Irregardless, you *should* end up with an image...hmmm,
you might have another issue.

I've experienced much of the same issues while writing my USB device
driver and trying to find an optimal read buffer.


On Sun, 17 Oct 1999, Eduardo Mazoni Andrade Marcal Mendes wrote:

> Hello
> I have been struggling to get my old UMax T-630 to work with sane
> for almost six months. I decided to start from scratch again just to
> see if I can find the missing point. As usual there is a very simple
> question that is getting in the way:

> Why my scanner works fine and fast with Adobe Photoshop
> 3.05-VistaScan 2.30 on Windows 98? When I switch to caldera
> 2.3-sane-1.0.1 is a completely different story: i) the scanner scans
> with tiny steps (so tiny that I can go for lunch and the thingy is
> still going) and ii) crashes with error messages at the end of the
> whole scanning process (that is, no image). What is going on?

David /\/elson
  "Management is doing things right; leadership is doing the right things."
                                         -- The 7 Habits Book

Source code, list archive, and docs:
To unsubscribe: echo unsubscribe sane-devel | mail