I’ve solved the problem.  After checking the serial data from the wand with a scope, I decided to check between the ears.  Operator error.  I wasn’t moving the wand fast enough over the bar code.  


Sent from my iPhone

On Jul 14, 2024, at 7:32 PM, Jesse Bertier <[email protected]> wrote:

Hello fellow Model T enthusiasts,

I recently tried my bar code reader, and it no longer works.  I don’t remember if the visible LED light was brighter at some point, but it’s really dim and doesn’t scan/read anything, even the sample bar codes in the manual.

Is the really dim light output normal?  Any suggestions at troubleshooting?

Thanks in advance!

Sent from my iPhone

On Jul 12, 2024, at 8:16 PM, Peter Noeth <[email protected]> wrote:


I entered a program from an actual PCM magazine, and it averaged between 1.5 and 2 seconds per full line.

It depends on a number of things:
  • consistency .... with barcode wand holding angle and swiping speed.
  • contrast and clearness of barcode printing.
  • flatness of the magazine pages. If you have to fight the magazine to lay flat, it will take longer.
It also helps to use some sort of "straight edge" to guide the barcode wand in a straight line.

Regards,

PeterN

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2024 22:55:25 -0700
From: B 9 <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [M100] [m100] Odd Topic - barcode storage
Message-ID:
        <CAG1tPevfnut4u-W9kW7oSsw-=[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

 <snip>

But... back to the topic at hand: bar codes. Does anyone have a barcode
wand and the time to test it out on PCM's Bar Code Listings
<https://archive.org/details/PCM-Magazine/1984-04_v1n10/mode/2up>? How many
seconds does it take to enter a long program and how many bytes is the
program? I expect it will not be fast, but since it would only be needed
once in a while ? like if the Model 100 navigating the ship has been reset
and loses all programs in memory ? slow but dependable may be a reasonable
compromise.

?b9


Reply via email to