Vista - Getting any scanner to work under Vista.

I found this tip buried in a thread here, so I thought I'd share it.

I have an old, but very good, HP Scanner (a ScanJet 4c). It's a SCSI
scanner that I used with my old laptop under XP Pro (with a Microtech USB to
SCSI adapter). Though the SCSI adapter installed under Vista and Vista
could see and recognize the scanner, it wouldn't accept HP's drivers.

I got Vuescan from Hamrick software (www.hamrick.com). I installed the
software, re-installed the HP software, and now everything works perfectly,
even HP's very useful HP Copy utility. According to the Hamrick
documentation, it works with over 700 different scanners.

I have nothing to do with Hamrick, other than I like their product (which
saved me the cost of buying a new scanner). What I don't understand is if
Hamrick can do this with a standalone, why can't Microsoft simply build this
capability into the OS?

Let me begin by saying that I, too, am using the Hamrick software for my HP
ScanJet 6250. This has been a great scanner with a document feeder, and has
been my workhorse. My ScanJet is considered obsolete by HP and no new
drivers are planned to be released so I will be using the Hamrick software
for some time to come.

That being said, it is up to HP to write the drivers for their devices, not
Microsoft. If HP had their drivers completed by the time Microsoft RTM'ed,
they would have been included in Vista. HP has usually been late with
drivers after the release of a new Microsoft operating system.

Kathleen



"PTravel" <ptravel@travelersvideo.com> wrote in message
news:uYWYn9cWHHA.5044@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>I found this tip buried in a thread here, so I thought I'd share it.
>
> I have an old, but very good, HP Scanner (a ScanJet 4c). It's a SCSI
> scanner that I used with my old laptop under XP Pro (with a Microtech USB
> to SCSI adapter). Though the SCSI adapter installed under Vista and Vista
> could see and recognize the scanner, it wouldn't accept HP's drivers.
>
> I got Vuescan from Hamrick software (www.hamrick.com). I installed the
> software, re-installed the HP software, and now everything works
> perfectly, even HP's very useful HP Copy utility. According to the
> Hamrick documentation, it works with over 700 different scanners.
>
> I have nothing to do with Hamrick, other than I like their product (which
> saved me the cost of buying a new scanner). What I don't understand is if
> Hamrick can do this with a standalone, why can't Microsoft simply build
> this capability into the OS?

"PTravel" <ptravel@travelersvideo.com> wrote in
news:uYWYn9cWHHA.5044@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl:

> I have nothing to do with Hamrick, other than I like their product
> (which saved me the cost of buying a new scanner). What I don't
> understand is if Hamrick can do this with a standalone, why can't
> Microsoft simply build this capability into the OS?

Someone from Microsoft answered that a few weeks ago...if Microsoft adds
too much functionality to their operating system, they will get sued by
companies that make a simliar product in the spirit of being anti-
competitive. Certain built-in programs such as PC Backup are limited just
because of this fact.

Adam

"kmelby" <kmelby@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:eMVkLvdWHHA.4872@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> Let me begin by saying that I, too, am using the Hamrick software for my
> HP ScanJet 6250. This has been a great scanner with a document feeder, and
> has been my workhorse. My ScanJet is considered obsolete by HP and no new
> drivers are planned to be released so I will be using the Hamrick software
> for some time to come.
>
> That being said, it is up to HP to write the drivers for their devices,
> not Microsoft. If HP had their drivers completed by the time Microsoft
> RTM'ed, they would have been included in Vista. HP has usually been late
> with drivers after the release of a new Microsoft operating system.
>
> Kathleen

I agree, but HP is rather notorious about not supporting older hardware.


>
>
>
> "PTravel" <ptravel@travelersvideo.com> wrote in message
> news:uYWYn9cWHHA.5044@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>I found this tip buried in a thread here, so I thought I'd share it.
>>
>> I have an old, but very good, HP Scanner (a ScanJet 4c). It's a SCSI
>> scanner that I used with my old laptop under XP Pro (with a Microtech USB
>> to SCSI adapter). Though the SCSI adapter installed under Vista and
>> Vista could see and recognize the scanner, it wouldn't accept HP's
>> drivers.
>>
>> I got Vuescan from Hamrick software (www.hamrick.com). I installed the
>> software, re-installed the HP software, and now everything works
>> perfectly, even HP's very useful HP Copy utility. According to the
>> Hamrick documentation, it works with over 700 different scanners.
>>
>> I have nothing to do with Hamrick, other than I like their product (which
>> saved me the cost of buying a new scanner). What I don't understand is
>> if Hamrick can do this with a standalone, why can't Microsoft simply
>> build this capability into the OS?
>
>

"Adam Leinss" <aleinss@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns98E38DB0BD124aleinsshotmailcom@207.46.248.16...
> "PTravel" <ptravel@travelersvideo.com> wrote in
> news:uYWYn9cWHHA.5044@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl:
>
>> I have nothing to do with Hamrick, other than I like their product
>> (which saved me the cost of buying a new scanner). What I don't
>> understand is if Hamrick can do this with a standalone, why can't
>> Microsoft simply build this capability into the OS?
>
> Someone from Microsoft answered that a few weeks ago...if Microsoft adds
> too much functionality to their operating system, they will get sued by
> companies that make a simliar product in the spirit of being anti-
> competitive. Certain built-in programs such as PC Backup are limited just
> because of this fact.

Sorry, but that's complete garbage (I'm an attorney -- I know). Providing
drivers in the OS for existing 3rd party hardware does not, in any way
whatsoever, implicate illegal tying or anti-trust. Whoever responded for
Microsoft should stick to technical issues and leave the law to those of us
who actually understand it.


>
> Adam

In message <O0uWUFeWHHA.3332@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl> "PTravel"
<ptravel@travelersvideo.com> wrote:

>"kmelby" <kmelby@comcast.net> wrote in message
>news:eMVkLvdWHHA.4872@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>> Let me begin by saying that I, too, am using the Hamrick software for my
>> HP ScanJet 6250. This has been a great scanner with a document feeder, and
>> has been my workhorse. My ScanJet is considered obsolete by HP and no new
>> drivers are planned to be released so I will be using the Hamrick software
>> for some time to come.
>>
>> That being said, it is up to HP to write the drivers for their devices,
>> not Microsoft. If HP had their drivers completed by the time Microsoft
>> RTM'ed, they would have been included in Vista. HP has usually been late
>> with drivers after the release of a new Microsoft operating system.
>>
>> Kathleen
>
>I agree, but HP is rather notorious about not supporting older hardware.

Which is largely their own fault too -- If HP would stick with more
standardized interfaces across their entire product lines, we wouldn't
run into this.

HP has figured it out for the higher end product lines, but for their
low end consumer crap, HP seems to go out of their way to make sure
their products are limited to small ranges of drivers.
--
Insert something clever here.

"DevilsPGD" <spam_narf_spam@crazyhat.net> wrote in message
news:08g6u250ehq9f7heem692hrrj06cbume7u@4ax.com...
> In message <e3mLoGeWHHA.4832@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl> "PTravel"
> <ptravel@travelersvideo.com> wrote:
>
>>"Adam Leinss" <aleinss@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:Xns98E38DB0BD124aleinsshotmailcom@207.46.248.16...
>>> "PTravel" <ptravel@travelersvideo.com> wrote in
>>> news:uYWYn9cWHHA.5044@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl:
>>>
>>>> I have nothing to do with Hamrick, other than I like their product
>>>> (which saved me the cost of buying a new scanner). What I don't
>>>> understand is if Hamrick can do this with a standalone, why can't
>>>> Microsoft simply build this capability into the OS?
>>>
>>> Someone from Microsoft answered that a few weeks ago...if Microsoft adds
>>> too much functionality to their operating system, they will get sued by
>>> companies that make a simliar product in the spirit of being anti-
>>> competitive. Certain built-in programs such as PC Backup are limited
>>> just
>>> because of this fact.
>>
>>Sorry, but that's complete garbage (I'm an attorney -- I know). Providing
>>drivers in the OS for existing 3rd party hardware does not, in any way
>>whatsoever, implicate illegal tying or anti-trust. Whoever responded for
>>Microsoft should stick to technical issues and leave the law to those of
>>us
>>who actually understand it.
>
> It's possible the same couple apply -- If MS creates a driver for
> printer brand but not others, the other printer manufacturers might have
> a valid tort.

One more time -- I'm a lawyer. That's garbage. There is no "tort" for
excluding someone's driver and excluding someone else's. This isn't
something for debate among lay people.


> --
> Insert something clever here.

"Adam Leinss" <aleinss@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns98E38DB0BD124aleinsshotmailcom@207.46.248.16...
> "PTravel" <ptravel@travelersvideo.com> wrote in
> news:uYWYn9cWHHA.5044@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl:
>
>> I have nothing to do with Hamrick, other than I like their product
>> (which saved me the cost of buying a new scanner). What I don't
>> understand is if Hamrick can do this with a standalone, why can't
>> Microsoft simply build this capability into the OS?
>
> Someone from Microsoft answered that a few weeks ago...if Microsoft adds
> too much functionality to their operating system, they will get sued by
> companies that make a simliar product in the spirit of being anti-
> competitive. Certain built-in programs such as PC Backup are limited just
> because of this fact.
>
> Adam

That's mostly nonsense. MS's legal problems arose from artificial product
tying and obstruction or 3rd party products, not for inclusion of it's own.

"DevilsPGD" <spam_narf_spam@crazyhat.net> wrote in message
news:15g6u2hfdvul33fekbphcjhctdn8nv1hgj@4ax.com...
> In message <O0uWUFeWHHA.3332@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl> "PTravel"
> <ptravel@travelersvideo.com> wrote:
>
>>"kmelby" <kmelby@comcast.net> wrote in message
>>news:eMVkLvdWHHA.4872@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>> Let me begin by saying that I, too, am using the Hamrick software for my
>>> HP ScanJet 6250. This has been a great scanner with a document feeder,
>>> and
>>> has been my workhorse. My ScanJet is considered obsolete by HP and no
>>> new
>>> drivers are planned to be released so I will be using the Hamrick
>>> software
>>> for some time to come.
>>>
>>> That being said, it is up to HP to write the drivers for their devices,
>>> not Microsoft. If HP had their drivers completed by the time Microsoft
>>> RTM'ed, they would have been included in Vista. HP has usually been late
>>> with drivers after the release of a new Microsoft operating system.
>>>
>>> Kathleen
>>
>>I agree, but HP is rather notorious about not supporting older hardware.
>
> Which is largely their own fault too -- If HP would stick with more
> standardized interfaces across their entire product lines, we wouldn't
> run into this.
>
> HP has figured it out for the higher end product lines, but for their
> low end consumer crap, HP seems to go out of their way to make sure
> their products are limited to small ranges of drivers.

And I agree with this, as well. Unfortunately, HP makes pretty nice
scanners. I'll note, though, that Microsoft supports an awful lot of
hardware in Vista. I've been surprised by how much stuff I can just plug in
and Vista recognizes it and automatically installs an internal driver. HP
isn't exactly an obcure little fly-by-night. It would have been nice if
Microsoft made some provision for this very popular hardware manufacturer.


> --
> Insert something clever here.

In message <uhyDUTeWHHA.3332@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl> "PTravel"
<ptravel@travelersvideo.com> wrote:

>"DevilsPGD" <spam_narf_spam@crazyhat.net> wrote in message
>news:08g6u250ehq9f7heem692hrrj06cbume7u@4ax.com...
>> In message <e3mLoGeWHHA.4832@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl> "PTravel"
>> <ptravel@travelersvideo.com> wrote:
>>
>>>"Adam Leinss" <aleinss@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>news:Xns98E38DB0BD124aleinsshotmailcom@207.46.248.16...
>>>> "PTravel" <ptravel@travelersvideo.com> wrote in
>>>> news:uYWYn9cWHHA.5044@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl:
>>>>
>>>>> I have nothing to do with Hamrick, other than I like their product
>>>>> (which saved me the cost of buying a new scanner). What I don't
>>>>> understand is if Hamrick can do this with a standalone, why can't
>>>>> Microsoft simply build this capability into the OS?
>>>>
>>>> Someone from Microsoft answered that a few weeks ago...if Microsoft adds
>>>> too much functionality to their operating system, they will get sued by
>>>> companies that make a simliar product in the spirit of being anti-
>>>> competitive. Certain built-in programs such as PC Backup are limited
>>>> just
>>>> because of this fact.
>>>
>>>Sorry, but that's complete garbage (I'm an attorney -- I know). Providing
>>>drivers in the OS for existing 3rd party hardware does not, in any way
>>>whatsoever, implicate illegal tying or anti-trust. Whoever responded for
>>>Microsoft should stick to technical issues and leave the law to those of
>>>us
>>>who actually understand it.
>>
>> It's possible the same couple apply -- If MS creates a driver for
>> printer brand but not others, the other printer manufacturers might have
>> a valid tort.
>
>One more time -- I'm a lawyer. That's garbage. There is no "tort" for
>excluding someone's driver and excluding someone else's. This isn't
>something for debate among lay people.

Most of the lawyers I've worked with in my professional life have been
much better with details then you are.

I didn't say excluding someone's driver and excluding someone else's.
Nor did I say "including someone's driver and excluding someone else's"

I said "Creates a driver" -- There is a world of difference.
--
Insert something clever here.