Articles: Other
 

Bookmark and Share

(3) 
Pages: [ 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 ]

Conclusion

Hewlett-Packard used to be a leader in the scanner market, updating its product line quite frequently. HP’s scanners featured cute design and good functionality. In those times (not long ago, by the way) the Scanjet brand, and maybe AGFA’s SnapScan, enjoyed the best recognition and highest popularity in the market. But I think HP’s improper price policy at some stage led to the company’s losing its positions here. New players emerged who offered simple but functional models that appealed to the user not only with their low price but also with good software support. According to IDC, the sales of leading companies shrunk so heavily that AGFA had to leave the SOHO scanner market altogether, not coping with the aggressive market competition. Now we see that HP has lost its leadership, too. The model range isn’t as frequently updated as before, and the models themselves can’t stand a critical glance. People buy HP scanners more of “inertia” now – they still trust the renowned brand.

Basing on the results of my today’s tests I wouldn’t recommend spending such a big sum of money for a Scanjet 8200. If you need a really high-performance office machine to digitize sheet originals you may want to consider Epson GT scanners. And if you intend to spend no more than $500 and have a good device with an option of scanning slides and film, Epson’s top-model will suit you best. Hewlett-Packard has long lost its leading role in this market.

Highs:

  • High resolution;
  • A number of programmable buttons;
  • Slide-adapter;
  • Can be adjusted for duplex scanning.

Lows:

  • High price (and I can’t comprehend what useful functions we’re asked to pay so much for);
  • The functionality of the scanner’s software is very low;
  • You have to re-type in the scan settings each time;
  • The lamp takes too long to warm up before each action;
  • Low noise tolerance;
  • Color aberrations on high-contrast areas.
 
Pages: [ 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 ]

Discussion

Comments currently: 3
Discussion started: 03/09/05 08:03:34 AM
Latest comment: 04/21/07 07:25:08 AM

View comments

Add your Comment




Latest materials in Other section

Article Rating

Article Rating: 9.6667 out of 10
 
Rate this article:
Excellent
Average
Poor