Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!olivea!oliveb!bunker!hcap!hnews!396!5.18!Walter.Siren
From: Walter.Siren@p18.f5.n396.z1.fidonet.org (Walter Siren)
Newsgroups: misc.handicap
Subject: infallible scanning
Message-ID: <17183@bunker.UUCP>
Date: 23 Jan 91 15:34:26 GMT
Sender: wtm@bunker.UUCP
Reply-To: Walter.Siren@p18.f5.n396.z1.fidonet.org
Distribution: misc
Organization: FidoNet node 1:396/5.18 - Pontchippi, New Orleans LA
Lines: 29
Approved: wtm@bunker.UUCP

Index Number: 13194

[This is from the Blink Talk Conference]

 JS> Do you find any other scanners better than the Arkenstone?  

     No, but that does not say anything for what I can accomplish with it.

 JS> That was really not Arkenstone's fault, although I DO wish it
 JS> could deal with things better.  Some one looked at the manual
 JS> and told me that it DID look kinda fuzzy. Another person told me
 JS> that key strokes (it's a software manual) and key words were
 JS> written in slanted lettering and italics.  Perhaps this was a
 JS> contributing factor.

     Yes, but everyone was saying that arkenstone could scan a lots of funts.  

I even tried to scan my bank statement, and I thought that it wwas
because I did not know how.  So I took it to the ACB convention,
and had the arkenstone people scan it.  The president of arkenstone
scanned it twice, and admitted that it was not accurate, but could
be used.  If a bank statement scan is not accurate, it will not do
to scan it with any scanner.

               Walter 

--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!396!5.18!Walter.Siren
Internet: Walter.Siren@p18.f5.n396.z1.fidonet.org