Hi all, I'm working with a customer who is evaluating the MC9190 and Honeywell Dolphin 99GX. Both devices are configured with imagers and the decode rate is pretty much even except when scanning dirty or slighty damaged barcodes. The 99GX is able to decode these barcodes more consistently then the 9190. This is a truck tire company. They sell new and retread truck tires so they have a large amount of dirty and/or slightly damaged barcodes on the truck tires. I'm looking to see if anyone has run into a similar situation and if anyone has suggestions for configuration changes that could help our ability to decode these less than perfect barcodes. I've made basic changes in DataWedge like turning off all symbologies except for Code3of9 and I2of5. TIA, Tom P.
MC9190 Scanning VS. Honeywell Dolphin 99GX// Expert user has replied. |
5 Replies
Eugene,
Thanks for the feedback on this! SPR 22177 seems to be a different problem. The problem my customer is experiencing is only with dirty and/or slightly damaged code3of9 and i2of5 barcodes. Scanning of code3of9 and i2of5 barcodes that are in good shape is no problem. If you think the fix in SPR 22177 will address this issue I’ll load and test it out but from what I can tell it is a very different issue. Thanks, Tom P.
It is difficult to say without seeing the issue. In any case I believe it worth testing in case you can reproduce the issue
what is the MC9190 configuration? is it Lorax, se960, blockbaster? what type of labels? what BSP? Any patches?
The 9190 has the blockbuster imager, BSP - 41.03, labels are Code3of9 and i2of5. No patches are installed. MC9190-G30SWEQA6WR
take the look to SPR 22177. Seems the same issue Please, put attention that you can not proivde fix from there to the customer on this step.