placing their DLLs in the System folder. However, a work around to this
problem is to put the DLL in question (the one that the newly installed
application wants to place in the System folder, overwriting the current
DLL in that folder) in the application's own folder. Then create a zero
--
From: Enoch's Vision, Inc. (Cary Enoch R...)
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: Silverfast vs Nikon Software?
Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2001 08:32:06 -0400
At 07:10 13-08-01 +, you wrote:
Cary wrote (re: Silverfast demo):
Been there. Did
At 13:17 14-08-01 +, you wrote:
Cary wrote:
This technique can help many balky applications to run correctly on Win2K.
This (below) sounds like a good answer to a bad problem. Before I try it
on my next install, though, has anyone here tried this type of custom
installation on Win98?
The
Cary wrote (re: Silverfast demo):
Been there. Did that. On my Win2K system the SIlverfast demo made NikonScan
inoperative. I had to uninstall Silverfast and reinstall NikonScan before
it would work again.
I don't have SF or NS (or even a Nikon), but I've experienced that
phenomenon *more* than
At 19:11 12-08-01 +0100, David Gordon wrote:
rlb [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote on Sun, 12 Aug 2001 07:31:43 -0400
I would appreciate some thoughts from those that use Silverfast.
It has a very steep learning curve. It is hard to use. It is unintuitive.
It has a very poor user interface.
It make
Since you're asking about SilverFast, I assume you've already made up your
mind that you want it and are looking for validation that you've made the
right decision. OK, "Buy it, you'll love it!" I think you'll enjoy its
features and its flexibility, such as letting you do a raw scan with Ai and
Vision, Inc. (Cary Enoch R...) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, August 12, 2001 9:20 PM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: Silverfast vs Nikon Software?
At 19:11 12-08-01 +0100, David Gordon wrote:
rlb [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote on Sun, 12 Aug 2001 07:31:43 -0400
I would
