Microtek ScanWizard Pro for Mac

User Reviews

• Can't make it work with ScanMaker X12usl scanner

  EdwardG--2008January 18, 2010

  Pros

  The price would be great if it only worked with my scanner.

  Cons

  Over the years, I have tried several versions of the Microtek drivers for different Mac operating systems, but have never been able to make one work reliably. Much prefer the VueScan driver.

  Summary

  ---

• Hard to believe...

  OxyParadoxMay 1, 2008

  Pros

  Cons

  Summary

  This review was originally posted on VersionTracker.com.<br />Our Microtek i900 has been almost impossible to wrestle under control using Microtek's PHENOMENALLY badly designed ScanWizard software. Starting off, when you install the software, it actually creates a folder called "Applications" - in the primary user's folder! Helloooooo? After you've wrestled with ScanWizard for enough hours of sudden crashes, impossibility of getting the TWAIN drivers to work importing directly into Adobe CS3 apps, you might be tempted to run the "Uninstaller" which Microtek sees fit to install with every installation. Let's see - if I were going to automatically install an uninstaller, I wonder... would I also contemplate the fact that perhaps some users are uninstalling in order to attempt a clean install? If so, I might be tempted to have the uninstaller actually UNINSTALL THE APPLICATION. Which it will do, provided you've left in the unecessarry Scanwizard folder it created in your Applications folder, which - you guessed it - contains the application, and the uninstaller! Then, it might be a good idea if the uninstaller actually removed the plug-ins it's placed in the Adobe CS3 apps' plug-in folders, the Application Support files it's installed, and last but not least, six or seven preference files for "Microtek" "ScanMaker" "Scanwizard" a bunch of other stuff. This semi-workable scanner is hobbled by the lamest software ever attempted by a company who obviously run Windows EVERYTHING, bought one Mac (a used iMac, I'd guess) and tried to build software for it.

  ---

• Questions???

  loushainFebruary 13, 2008

  Pros

  Cons

  Summary

  This review was originally posted on VersionTracker.com.<br />I have a ScanMaker i800. In OS 10.4.11 and prior OSs, I was using ScanMaker 5. I prefer ScanMaker 5, since, for me, it appears to be more intuitive. I had trouble getting PhotoShop CS3 to work under 10.5, until the 10.5.2 update, so I could not use my scanner. Macintosh Update 10.5.2 fixed the PhotoShop problem, and that's when I discovered that Microtek had not updated the driver (in ScanMaker 5) to work in Leopard (10.5). A Microtek FAQ, however, said the ScanMaker Pro 7, V7.541 did. V 7.541 appears to have a later creation date than V 7.52, I could not find V7.56. ScanMaker Pro 7 V 7.541 does indeed work under Leopard and I am currently using it. I still prefer ScanMaker 5, but the Pro version appears to have all the features I need.

  ---

• 7.56 IS the latest version but error with .dmg

  TheRichMoogJanuary 17, 2008

  Pros

  Cons

  Summary

  This review was originally posted on VersionTracker.com.<br />I share the dmg corruption error but i chose to open anyway! The installer comes up with error installing but new version works fine.. Not sure what's going on but all seems ok!

  ---

• Microtek and Software

  John RichardsonJanuary 4, 2006

  Pros

  Cons

  Summary

  This review was originally posted on VersionTracker.com.<br />It seems that we have a company which is quite willing to build and sell us scanners. Sadly however when it comes to producing software (that incidental thing that makes it all come together and returns your investment) they are sadly lacking. Look you guys at Microtek, if your listening, get your act together - or better still throw a few thousand dollars at Hamrick and do a deal to ship vuescan with your products.

  ---

• Horrible

  MicPittSeptember 29, 2005

  Pros

  Cons

  Summary

  This review was originally posted on VersionTracker.com.<br />Be wise...Avoid the aggravation of working with these drivers and this type of tech support.

  ---

• The OCR module *works*?!

  Levon RiverAugust 19, 2005

  Pros

  Cons

  Summary

  This review was originally posted on VersionTracker.com.<br />For what? Does it make waffles? It sure doesn't OCR. No, I repent of saying that: it does OCR, but if you select plain text as the filetype, it will create HTML. If you select PDF as the file type, it will create RichText. If you select plain text again as the filetype, it will send it to your text application as PDF--then crash. It is Bedlam. Whoever our enemies are, donate the Microtek programmers to them and we can cut our defense budget in half.

  ---

• Not ideal, but it works

  LStewartMay 18, 2005

  Pros

  Cons

  Summary

  This review was originally posted on VersionTracker.com.<br /><p>Everybody really rags on Microtek here, don't they? I'll admit my experience with them has not been ideal, but I have pretty much <i>always</i> had a basically functional scanner and driver since buying my ScanMaker 4900 several years ago. Now, maybe all the features haven't been present all the time (notably OCR), and maybe the drivers did bad things to the colors if I try to make too many adjustments before scanning, but... the <i>basic functionality</i> of being able to get a good, sharp 16 bit-per-channel color scan from whatever was on the glass has always been there for me, through OS 10.1, 10.2 and 10.3. (Has anybody tried it on 10.4 yet?)</p> <br> <p>Now admittedly, it has not always been easy. I have almost always had to follow a very manual installation process, going in and carefully (and thoroughly) trashing old "microtek" and "scanmaker" files and folders, running the new installation, etc. But when I carefully followed instructions from support, it always got things working pretty much like they said it would.</p> <br> <p>Speaking of Microtek's support guys, they're not a bad lot--especially considering the grumpy customers they have to deal with 24/7. It's not their fault the software takes some DIY work to install it right. When I expressed thanks once after they sent me some work-around instructions, they practically fell over themselves thanking me for taking time to send them a thank you email. Seems it's pretty rare that they get a kind word, which is sad for them. (The programmers get paid a lot to create crappy software, and the tech support guys suffer for it while being paid much less. I tell you, life ain't fair.)</p> <br> <p>Anyway, to recap, I've been using ScanWizard since they released it for OS X, and it's always worked--at least for basic scanning functionality. I do most of my scans at 16 bits, and then color correct in Photoshop. Attempts to tweak levels & curves in the driver (before the final scan) have always yielded very unpredictable results for me, so I avoid it.</p> <br> <p>My particular scanner (ScanMaker 4900) is USB-only and is sadly not supported by other drivers, such as VueScan. I'm sure if I could use VueScan, I'd be very satisfied with the hardware. But as it sits, ScanWizard is my only choice, and it is kind of painful. The user interface is awkward and the color correction results are wonky.</p> <br> <p>So although I have been somewhat defensive of Microtek in this message, I have to say I don't recommend anybody buy their scanners--at least not the ones that rely on ScanWizard. Check VueScan's "supported scanners" list (www.hamrick.com) and find a Microtek scanner that is supported by VueScan, and then buy <i>that</i> scanner. Just don't buy one that requires you to use ScanWizard.</p>

  ---

• Total wast of time!

  brunswickworksMarch 16, 2005

  Pros

  Cons

  Summary

  This review was originally posted on VersionTracker.com.<br />If you want your old Microtek scanner to run, <p>try VueScan instead. You can download their free trial from their website. hamrick.com<p>There are not enough profane words to describe my frustration with Microtek's software!<p>Not only has it never worked consistantly, it crashes in both classic and OS 9 environments. My Microtek scanner has only functioned about 40% of the time that I have owned it due to software malfunction in all versions of ScanMaker that I have used.<p>I don't usually get irrate when dealing with customer service representatives because I am a computer technician myself. Unfortunately, I had to become a total jerk to get Microtek to finally send me an updated driver in the mail after numerous attempts to download drivers from their "support" links. When it did work, it ate up scads of memory for it's cumbersome push-button and detection software. When I removed these from the startup folder the darn software refused to function at all.

  ---

• This is a piece of junk!

  tinymc--2008December 19, 2004

  Pros

  Cons

  Summary

  This review was originally posted on VersionTracker.com.<br />It's really simple <b>ScanWizard does not work with Macs</b>. With a sheet feeder, you'd be better off photographing the document and uploading it. It crashes so badly that it won't even force quict. It then brings down the whole of OS X, Something that no other piece of software has done for me in three years. And all this is after I downloaded three different update versions, from three different badly organised international sites. Microtek are a joke. <b>I'd rather have a virus

  ---

• Show reviewsHide reviews
• Rate it