[Libs-Or] Scan Pro 2000 vs 300 model

[Bob Jones]

Hmmm.  I guess I ignored the original question, but I just went up to our genealogy and local history room and, guess what?  We have a ScanPro 300!  Not sure when we bought it, but since the new building opened 10 years ago.  I'm sure we chose it because we could afford it.  It has worked well, never needed repairs.

-Bob Jones
Milton-Freewater Public Library


-----Original Message-----
From: libs-or-bounces at listsmart.osl.state.or.us [mailto:libs-or-bounces at listsmart.osl.state.or.us] On Behalf Of glenna rhodes
Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2013 4:26 PM
To: 'libs-or at listsmart.osl.state.or.us'
Subject: [Libs-Or] Scan Pro 2000 vs 300 model

Hi all - we followed the discussion earlier this year about updating old microfilm reader printers to the Scan Pro. I noticed that not a single library went with the Scan Pro 300 but instead have the Scan Pro 2000.  Can anyone provide insight as to why they didn't choose the less expensive version?  What significant feature(s) were missing? Thanks for your assistance.  Glenna


Glenna Rhodes
Community Services Manager
Deschutes Public Library
507 NW Wall Street
Bend, OR 97701
(541) 617-7087
glennar at deschuteslibrary.org<mailto:glennar at deschuteslibrary.org>
http://www.deschuteslibrary.org<http://www.deschuteslibrary.org/>

[cid:image001.jpg at 01CE36D2.DDF55D00]
Know More.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://omls.oregon.gov/pipermail/libs-or/attachments/20130411/4f104ae6/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 25827 bytes
Desc: image001.jpg
URL: <https://omls.oregon.gov/pipermail/libs-or/attachments/20130411/4f104ae6/attachment.jpg>