hlockwood
Well-known
I'm using the 4000ED and NikonScan 4.02 on Mac OS 10.5.8 (Leopard). The software has been acting erratic, but I could usually get it going, sometimes after a series of secret incantations. But today it was no go. System Profiler didn't even recognize the Firewire connection.
So I called Nikon. They told me that this OS is incompatible with NS 4.02 and suggested it was only fortuitous that I was ever able to run it with Leopard. That's the bad news.
The good news is that Nikon will release a new version of NS in Jan. 2010. Who would have thought, after all these years?
Unless there's a firmware upgrade as well, however, my problem may not be resolved because I downloaded Vuescan, and it doesn't recognize the scanner either. So, no scanning for the next month or two - or more.
Harry
So I called Nikon. They told me that this OS is incompatible with NS 4.02 and suggested it was only fortuitous that I was ever able to run it with Leopard. That's the bad news.
The good news is that Nikon will release a new version of NS in Jan. 2010. Who would have thought, after all these years?
Unless there's a firmware upgrade as well, however, my problem may not be resolved because I downloaded Vuescan, and it doesn't recognize the scanner either. So, no scanning for the next month or two - or more.
Harry
There's no problem recognizing Nikon scanners even with Snow Leopard.
I work with a publishing company running lots of Macs. They have Nikon scanners running on USB, Firewire, even SCSI with adapters.
The device is recognized by all. Vuescan finds all, NikonScan works usually with the occasional crash which I think is due to third party system add-ons.
If your Mac can't see a 4000ed there's something wrong with your cable, your port or the scanner itself. It's not an OS problem.
Check System Info and see if the device is on the bus.
Erratic Firewire port is a known Mac flaw. Reset PRAM and Google for other hocus pocus remedies, like resetting motherboard.
I work with a publishing company running lots of Macs. They have Nikon scanners running on USB, Firewire, even SCSI with adapters.
The device is recognized by all. Vuescan finds all, NikonScan works usually with the occasional crash which I think is due to third party system add-ons.
If your Mac can't see a 4000ed there's something wrong with your cable, your port or the scanner itself. It's not an OS problem.
Check System Info and see if the device is on the bus.
Erratic Firewire port is a known Mac flaw. Reset PRAM and Google for other hocus pocus remedies, like resetting motherboard.
1. Boot/restart your computer and immediately hold down command-option-o-f until you reach the open-firmware screen (you'll know it when you see it).
2. Type "reset-nvram" (no quotes, of course) and press enter.
3. Type "reset-all" (no quotes, of course) and press enter.
See if that gets your FireWire ports working again.
__________________
2. Type "reset-nvram" (no quotes, of course) and press enter.
3. Type "reset-all" (no quotes, of course) and press enter.
See if that gets your FireWire ports working again.
__________________
hlockwood
Well-known
Thanks much; I'll try this. Indeed, Apple Profiler doesn't see anything on the Firewire port.
Harry
robert blu
quiet photographer
Not sure if this can help you, but on my i.Mac (intel) if I connect an external hard disk via firewire the scanner is not seen but if it is connected via usb it is seen. I'm not an expert, this is just my experience.
robert
robert
hlockwood
Well-known
Well, I tried that several times and was unable to get that screen. But it did inspire me to reset the pram - and that did it! Still, I'd like to know why I couldn't get to the firmware screen. Any thoughts?
Harry
hlockwood
Well-known
dcsang
Canadian & Not A Dentist
I wonder if that new version of NikonScan will be "free" to those that own Nikon scanners or if Nikon's going to charge for it. . .
Cheers,
Dave
Cheers,
Dave
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
Do Intel Macs even have a PRAM? They're just PCs after all, and PCs don't.
They don't have Open Firmware either, booting is done through EFI.
They don't have Open Firmware either, booting is done through EFI.
hlockwood
Well-known
Evidently they do have a PRAM; there are instructions for resetting it, and it works. Can't comment on your second statement.
Harry
Pavel+
Established
Macs do have open firmware - that is what EFI is.
It uses forth as the language so if you know it you will find it easy to pass it paramaters.
It uses forth as the language so if you know it you will find it easy to pass it paramaters.
bwcolor
Veteran
Vuescan
Vuescan
No problem with Vuescan and the 9000ED on Snow Leopard. I really like this software. It is flexible and easy to use.
Vuescan
No problem with Vuescan and the 9000ED on Snow Leopard. I really like this software. It is flexible and easy to use.
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
I guess on Intel Macs the same key combination is used to reset something else than on PowerPCs. Probably they just call it by the old name so that users don't get confused. (A bit like putting memory cards in film canisters.
)I'd assume they use the little CMOS RAM area where PCs have been storing their BIOS configuration (the one backed up by the clock battery) since the 1980s and the days of the original IBM PC. Maybe that's also the reason why OS X stores less stuff in non-volatile RAM than older MacOS versions did.
Macs do have open firmware - that is what EFI is.
It uses forth as the language so if you know it you will find it easy to pass it paramaters.
Actually Open Firmware and EFI are different things; Open Firmware was originally developed by Sun for SPARC-based computers and was for some time proposed as IEEE standard for non-Intel architectures, while EFI was developed by Intel as a replacement for BIOS for Intel architectures and is now managed by the EFI group. Macs stopped using Open Firmware and use EFI now, precisely because Apple switched to the Intel architecture. EFI has some provisions for interpreted boot code, but not for Forth. I don't know if there's still a Forth interpreter in Apple's EFI startup system, but I doubt it; after all there's no reason to be compatible with boot scripts from a completely different architecture.