This digitizing software tool converts an image file showing a graph or map, into numbers. The image file can come from a scanner, digital camera or screenshot. The numbers can be read on the screen, and written or copied to a spreadsheet.
Not trying to run this project down, but there are a bunch of notes in various spots on the web testifying that this download for Windows (5_1) is missing a bunch of the .dll's from the Qt project. So one must download that project (1.26 GIGAbytes, by the way). And so a small, efficient code is turned to bloatware. Further, when one does this, one gets a "Missing MSCVP100D.dll" message, indicating (I believe) that the project was compiled using /debug instead of /release. I don't do much coding, and so don't have gcc installed. In andy case, the software, as released, is absolutely useless for most people. There may be folks that are a few developers that have a QT and debugger installed, but this misses most potential users. I can't give any positive marks to software that is released in an unusable form. I'm dying for someone to fix this. But I've already wasted an hour trying to get it to work, and I'm thinking that even if I could install the programming package that has mscvp100d.dll, I'd get another message stating "Can't run because your system does not have obscure_mysterious.dll". Or I'd get a message that I had the wrong gcc (or whatever compiler), or that I need a whole new raft of dlls and packages to run the compiler. And I'd have to spend an hour running that down. In general, I think software on sourceforge, if offered in compiled form, should be statically linked, or should have the needed .dlls or should only link to .dlls that are part of the o/s. Or at least should state "You need to download and install the following packages for this program to work". And two versions should ALWAYS be offered: The full, whiz-bang propeller head version, and the minimal bombproof exectuable. My view, anyway. Terribly disappointing - I'd really like to try this.
Most of the 5 start reviews appear to be FAKE and written by the same person. Not ethical. Bad,bad,bad.-1
This is puzzling to me. While trying to install this app, the installer kept complaining that I'm missing a BUNCH of DLLs. I went on the support forum, and see that a bunch of other people have been having the same problems since December - some 9 months ago - but the installer prior to December worked fine. I know this is free and all, but time isn't free ... Why not fix the new installer, or revert back to the code that was working for most/all users?