Most Helpful Customer Reviews
|
|
131 of 138 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Good product, does what it claims - to organize your receipts, November 1, 2008
This review is from: NeatReceipts Mobile Scanner and Digital Filing System (Electronics)
I upgraded from the Neat Receipts 3.0 scanner to the Neat Works 4.0 scanner package recently. I like the Neat Receipts 3.0 scanner, but the upgrade is really worth it.
For starters the quick scan center with the new version takes less system resources and it allows the user to enter receipts in batches, which is efficient. I was able to scan a pile of 277+ receipts in one night, while watching television. Pretty painless and easy to do without requiring a lot of attention, so you can make good use of downtime while you're watching TV / relaxing, etc.
The best part of this is not the physical scanner, it's the software. It allows me to look up previous receipts in a jiffy, and lets me shred / toss old receipts. The physical scanner is nice too though. It's definitely not photo quality, but that's not why I bought this package. The scanner works fairly well / quickly for most receipts, a bit better than the silver version even though they're supposedly the same hardware. I find with the older version the USB would fail to be recognized by Windows XP, but no such problems with the new version.
If you want to organize your receipts and keep good records, I highly recommend this package! It's the one of the few products that actually does what it claims to do. Excellent product.
Future improvement wishes would be speedier scans, but that is limited by the scanning technology and hardware specifications.
FYI - yes it will sometimes have difficulty scanning very light receipts, but that is to be expected with a scanner like this. If one expects photo quality scanner this is not the one to buy. A photo quality scanner will take too long to scan receipts. This scanner captures receipts information pretty well but it does not produce a photo replica of the receipt.
Also, the other reviewer mentioned problems with USB. Quite often that is a problem with Windows, especially on a Windows system that's been run for quite sometime and with a lot of other accessories installed. I installed this on 3 of my windows XP systems and they all worked fine. If I ever have a problem I would reinstall Windows as Windows tends to get cluttered with hardware profiles and have problems with USB devices.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you?
 
|
|
|
|
|
|
69 of 72 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Loving it during my first 8 hrs of ownership, March 16, 2009
This review is from: NeatReceipts Mobile Scanner and Digital Filing System (Electronics)
The ratio of bad reviews to good reviews here on this NeatWorks scanner was dubious so though I desperately needed a receipt-scanning solution, I really hadn't taken the plunge until I visited Costco and must've been riding a wave of positive-ness because I walked in, wasn't looking to buy anything, but when I saw only 2 left of this product on the shelf, I took one.
Got home, inserted the set-up CD as instructed and nothing. I'm running a new (1yr old) Dell with very sufficient hardware/memory running WinXP. But I figure sometimes the CD set-up is wonky, so I ejected then reinserted and it worked; brought up the set-up initialization screen. It asked me to check online for a version newer than what was shipped; I did, and there was. So after 10 minutes of downloading a 200mb file, I was done. Clicked the file, set-up was a snap (took 10-12 minutes) and off I went. Connected the scanner by USB cable and everything worked; no crashing.
Tested a batch of 15 receipts to see if it could handle the crinkled, faded, potentially illegible imprints on what seemingly is the standard thermal paper being used by all merchants. Alas, this product worked fine; and it worked as promised. Scanned all receipts, and was able to make not only the correct (99% of the time) OCR function for amounts, dates, retailer, and sales tax, it also was able to be relatively correct in judging which sector of retail (general receipt, food, etc.) it should categorize my purchases.
So the initial test was done; I was pleased. So now I wanted to dig deep and scan roughly 6 weeks of receipts that I'd amassed -- roughly 200 receipts. This would've really been a test, since half of these receipts were nearly 4-6 weeks old, they were crinkled from being shoved into my pocket or folio while on the road, and some were teeny-tiny receipts like taxi receipts from Manhattan.
Result? Got through it all, and except for roughly 5 receipts out of my total 197, the scanner and software were both able to recognize most receipt fields and categorize them correctly. Oddly, and I think this is because of the clarity of the receipt vs. software, some receipts were ported into the "Documents" category vs. "Receipts" area. That was remedied easily by dragging each image from "Documents" to "Receipts."
"Areas," you ask? The software gives you 3 distinct areas that it will move your raw scans into; those are RECEIPTS, DOCUMENTS, and BUSINESS CARDS. I'm guessing the software takes ques from the content plus the size of the scan to determine where images should go. Like I said, the software was mostly correct except for a few faded receipts, but when I moved those stray images from "Documents" to "Receipts," the software kicked-in and was able to read the proper field information (amount, etc.) correctly.
From these areas, you can then file your raw scans into varying folders that you can create, or into document types if you'd like to export as PDF, etc. It's pretty simple, and I have never used a product from NeatWorks, so I have no way to compare previous versions with this 4.5.2 version that I'm using.
I looked at negative reviews and can say that I have neither had the software or hardware cause crashes, reboots, stalls, freezes, or any other degradation of my laptop from working as it normally does.
Also, I had no real OCR problems with the scanner or software recognizing figures or names. In fact, the only constant problem I had was with drugstore chain "Longs Drugs" which uses only a logo and not typewritten version of its name on receipts, so the software took to recognizing the first item in my receipt as the name, so I had numerous prescription receipts filed as "Hallmark" since I had bought cards with those purchases. What amazes me is the software is able to decipher through all the cr*p that's listed on receipts; these days, surveys, serial numbers, and other gobbledy-gook are all listed and yet the software was able to filter through that and report the correct field information.
A couple cautions: 1) Handwritten numbers have never been recognized in any of my scans, 2) Export data to Quicken in groups based on the accounts you use in Quicken.
As to #1 above, those who have a lot of written-in totals at restaurants for tip, etc., will find this problematic. Every receipt I'd gotten for a meal (which were a lot) I had to correct with the tip included vs. the software recognizing only the subtotal before tip.
And as to #2 above, I found that importing into Quicken was a snap (as QIF file), but since Quicken will only dump all data in a QIF file into a single account, you need to filter this BEFORE the export. For example, if you use multiple cards like I do for various clients and you keep track of each account separately in Quicken, then you'd better categorize those purchases in NeatWorks accordingly, and then selectively export those transactions. That way, your import into Quicken is done per account. It's easier that way, than having to use the "Move Transaction" function in Quicken.
I'd say 4 stars because I had no elements of surprise and no hiccups in service. I'd rate it 5 stars after about 3-6 months of ownership if this flawless experience keeps up. I'll be back in September to report.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you?
|
|
|
|
|
|
198 of 222 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
Beware - Not Backward Compatible, January 6, 2009
This review is from: NeatReceipts Mobile Scanner and Digital Filing System (Electronics)
(NOTE: see my update on NeatWorks ver 5 below)
I have been using NeatReceipts for a couple of years now. I generally like the product, but I am now using BOTH the 'Classic ver 1.5.9" and the new Ver 4.0 software because NeatWorks broke a covenant with its' early adopters. They broke two of the cardinal rules of product development (1) never, ever, under any circumstances forget your early customers and their data and (2) never remove vital features from the product.
First, they "forgot" their "Classic ver 1.5.9" users. Versions of the software from 2.0 up thru the current ver 4.1 cannot recognize or import any of the receipts or documents scanned into the earlier version. I have personally talked to them about this for almost 2 years. At first, in early 2007, they repeatedly stated that they were hard at work on a migration solution. We depended on that statement, telling them how important it was for us to be able to access our archived data - for inventories, insurance and tax records.
But they finally just abandoned this effort and offered everyone a discount to upgrade to a later version. How is that going to help with restoring archived data? The data and file formats for their .elrec and .eldoc seem fairly simple - a scanned image and some recognized text fields. Why can't they import those formats like they allow for jpeg and tiff images?
They offered no acceptable reasons beyond that we are no longer working on that feature and "would you like to upgrade?". They seem oblivious to the frustrations they have caused a large number of their early customers. We even communicated with Rafi Spero, one of the companies owners. If he couldn't make it happen, you know they don't care about you as a customer. BEWARE THIS COMPANY.
Secondly: The "Classic" version allowed users to create folders and subfolders, etc. This was a fantastic way to organize receipts for cash, various credit cards, checks and debits, by year and then by month. Or to organize a copy of receipts for an inventory by broad categories and then further by store, year or vendor. So the initial features of both subfolders and the ability to copy receipts from yearly tax records to inventory folders was extremely useful and helpful in elimnating paperwork clutter.
The new ver 4 software does not support nested folders or copying receipts to other folders. Every time you scan a receipt, it goes into a folder. But all folders are on the same level. You can show and hide folders, but this is an extremely clumsy process and causes users a lot of extra work in trying to organize their invoices and receipts. If you want to copy a receipt, you have to scan it AGAIN. How brain-dead is that?
Bottom Line: This company has proven that, at their convenience, they will ignore or abandon prior versions of the software and remove vital features.
To fix some of their current short-coming, as mentioned above, it would not surprise me to see them create a new version of their software that is incompatible with what they are selling today.
DO NOT TRUST them with any vital data that you may need in the future.
UPDATE: 2-11-2010 - I have been given a preview of the new NeatWorks ver5 software. I don't know when it will be released but it seems to have (finally) added back in some of the features that went missing with ver 2 and onward. Now they also have a chance to allow for importing old receipts (".elrec" files) from their "Classic" users. If they do Import ".elrec" files many Classic users will be happy that their data is no longer "orphaned". I will then change my opinion and rating of NeatWorks and their products because they did admit to these past mistakes, listen and respond to their customers and "the true test of your character is how you respond to those mistakes."
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Most Recent Customer Reviews
|
Saving...
