Wanted: Recommendation for Sacnner, simple, USB powered

[graylocks]

Speedy wrote:
[quote=JEBB]
I dealt with the same issue and found that VueScan costs the same or more than a new Canon 110.

Except VueScan will most likely keep this and past/future scanners functional no matter what Apple does to it's OS.
that was my thinking on this.

[CJsNvrUrly]

graylocks wrote:
[quote=CJsNvrUrly]
When my daughter upgraded from her laptop to an iMac running Lion OS, her Canon LiDE 20 scanner wouldn't scan into Photoshop CS3 anymore. I bought her a new Canon LiDE 210. It kept the same small footprint she wanted. The specs on it were way better than the old scanner and it works with Photoshop! At the time (August), it was around $100/Staples.

did you happen to try her scanner with VueScan? i have an LIDE 30 and my scanner needs are definite needs but minimal. i will be upgrading to ML once i find a few days to deal with it all but i was hoping i would NOT need a whole new scanner.
I don't really remember. It was five months ago. We might have, but decided to go with a new scanner then for whatever reason. She's happy with it.

[space-time]

Cheap all in one printer with current OS support.

[Mr Downtown]

^How does an all-in-one run solely off USB power or fit in a backpack?

[dan steinberg]

Thans everyone for all the great responses (and I am a little ashamed at my typo

I went ahead and ordered the Life 110, one for us and one for my folks. A quick check of the canon drivers site confirmed what everyone said, it works with both 10.8 and Windows 7 64-bit.

I am also hoping that whatever newer version of scanning software comes with the scanner does away with some of the crazy limitations that my ancient version of Canoscan had:

-Not allowed to have blank spaces i the file title, when naming the saved title in the dialog box
-Not allowed to make file title more than a few characters
- No icon for the program when in the dock, just a blank stock icon

Nothing that's as big deal, but all indicative of how the software was most likely a quick and dirty port of some very old windows software.

I'm also open to suggestion if it makes more sense to do scanning from something like image capture, etc. One of my common workflows is to capture scans of multiple pages to a multi-page .pdf. Canoscan, for all its silliness, lets you do that, so anything I'd use instead would also have to allow for that specific task.

Thanks again!