Perhaps you already know all these things I hope this doesn’t come across as lecturing, because I don’t mean it that way. Product developers have to balance those costs against hard-to-predict gains in (say) number of users-or they have to count on increasing the price of the software to pay for developing and maintaining those features. Unfortunately, the “cost” of implementing those interfaces include more than just one-time developer time to (e.g.) create GUI elements in a preferences panel: they include things like debugging the additional code and behavior, writing test cases to test every new feature, continually updating the field/slider/button interfaces as the library is updated (a task made worse when the library changes its interface), documenting the user interface (and keeping the docs updated over time), answering user support questions, etc., etc. It often seems like it shouldn’t be too hard to add a few fields or sliders or buttons to a preference panel. I’m not a DEVONthink developer and can’t speak for them, but as a software developer of other things, I can answer in general terms why a given software tool might not provide access to all the controls and settings available in a software library it uses. So i wondered if you use the same library why not open this choices to your users? I hope this answers your question sufficiently? This is why i ask for some of the options to be included into DT. In another post i wondered why the imprinter when adding a small line of text is adding another 100kb for a small add like ‘Scanned: dd.mm.yyyy’ … for me size of docs still matters and i am really missing a single professional PDF and OCR solution on macOS - i hoped first that a Scansnap and DT would be sufficient, but for serveral occasions i found that you sometimes need PDFExpert, sometimes PDFpenPro or ABBYY standalone to get the desired result, which makes a workflow much harder to automate. Comparing a Letter with some colored imprint is somewhere above 800k in 200 DPI within DT while 380 KB with MRC and medium picture compression in ABBYY standalone in 300 DPI. For others another choice might fit better. For me that choice fits, but some documents i might accept a larger size. I intend to digitize all my paper based documents and develop a mostly paperless personal workflow and in my mind i like to keep those documents as small as possible while maintaining an acceptable quality, which i get with average picture compression and MRC.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |