Hey Joe - just curious. I saw an Ad on TV like last night or the Night
before - about a Scanner for the desktop. Its almost vertical - but, at
about a 30 degree angle - its kinda small - papers slid in top - then slide
out bottom. I suspect its NOT the same - as this was more consumer version -
and probably NOT running $400. But, still - just curious...

As for SQL - I don't really have experience with it - but, if the data is
sitting in a place you can access - there should be NO Reason you can't open
the data directly - and find out the structure - and then be able to access
- at least AFAIK!

-K-


-----Original Message-----
From: ProfoxTech [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Joe
Yoder
Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 3:09 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [NF] Neat scanner system info and questions

I am evaluating a Neat desktop scanner/software system.  Its purpose is to
scan all the paper work one would ordinarily file and to save the images
electronically.  It scans various sizes of paper into its input queue where
the data is OCRed, a document type is assigned, and the database fields are
populated.  
 
On the desktop, the users sees cabinet structure on the left, database
fields in the center, and scanned image on the right.  The image can be
enlarged and scrolled as needed, the document type and fields in the record
can be modified if necessary, and the records placed anywhere in the cabinet
structure.
 
The system can import data and receive documents printed to it.  It has some
reporting capabilities and export options including a direct link to Quick
Books.  There is, however, no provision to allow a Quick Books user to
"Drill down" to the source image from inside Quickbooks.
 
I have been told that the system is designed as an electronic filing cabinet
rather than an accounting system.  It only supports 3 document types:
Contacts, Documents, and Receipts.  I believe I can adapt this scheme to
handle the limited accounting I need to do but would really like to be able
to access the data directly from Foxpro rather than going through their
export process. 
 
I have submitted 10 different suggestions for improvement to the company so
far and gotten positive official replies to eight of them.  It seems like
this is a good sign.  If they implement most of what I have suggested the
package will provide better functionality and be much easier to use.
 
The Neat system installs and uses Microsoft SQL Server Compact Edition.  I
have asked several tech support individuals if there is a licensing issue
with my accessing the data through the "back door" - using direct access to
the SQL server.  The responses I have received indicated no prohibition but
no attempt on their part to support any questions or problems that result
from this approach.
 
Here are my questions:
1. Are any of you familiar with this or similar systems and willing to give
an opinion about whether the Neat system I have described at $400 seems like
a reasonable deal?  Are there other systems available that provide
equivalent or superior features at the same or lower cost?
2. I have no experience in working with SQL outside of VFP.  Would it be
feasible to connect to the server without any supporting information from
the company?  If so - a link to resources and examples would be quite
helpful
 
Thanks in Advance,
 
Joe 


--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
  text/plain (text body -- kept)
  text/html
---

[excessive quoting removed by server]

_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: [email protected]
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/3F5A8723EFF74FE08556077F53C169C2@Programming2
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Reply via email to