Volunteers to test new labels please

[roiphil]

Phil
You have to click into the top edit box before you use those buttons.
Try again and let me know.

DOH    off to watch extreme logging whilst i think to ones self what a plonker 
ps it worked by the way   

[ideasguy]

Its not your fault Phil.
Its obviously a hole I havent plugged (commonly known as a bug) so another little tweak required.

[Lyn and Malcolm]

Ver 31 is much quicker, 67 seconds here, but may not be a level playing field as the computer I am trying this on, is not directly connected to the printer. Data is being sent across a network to another computer to which the printer is connected.

Malcolm

[ideasguy]

Thanks for the feedback Malcolm. The biggest factor is the time to do the generation of the labels, before it gets to Print stage (preview or hard copy) so your figures are probably OK fr comparison.

I'm at a loss to explain why it takes 15 secs on my computer and all sorts of times on other computers.

The good thing is it works, and since the user can pick fonts, font sizes, bold etc, I hope its wortwhile.

I can provide a standard text output alternative, but it will be fixed font, font sizes etc.

Hopefully we wont have any label stock with more than 48 labels per sheet!

[bossgard]

George:

US Avery #5267. 80 labels per US 8-1/2"x11" sheet.  1/2"x1-3/4".

I suppose I'm asking too much, if I ask you to rush it?

(I just couldn't pass up the opportunity!)

- Toby

[bossgard]

George:
On second attempt today to get a faster time between starting of the ?Throbber?
and getting ?Print Review? still remained at approximately 6 minutes, the
timer between Delete and Save gave 365 seconds.

As far as I could determine, no other software programs were running on my computer
during that time.

Did print-out on US 8-1/2?x11? (2x10=20) label stock 1?x4? (25mm x 102 mm)
it registered OK with center at 4-1/4?. To register correctly otherwise the actual label
would probably measure ¾?x 1-3/4?, I searched via internet, US Avery,
but could not find any label to fit that layout.

Data on L4778 test print-out is spaced evenly as one would expect, 4 across and 12 up
= 48 labels per sheet.

- Toby

[ideasguy]

RE: (Toby)

US Avery #5267. 80 labels per US 8-1/2"x11" sheet.  1/2"x1-3/4".

Those could be done with a design for plain text, Toby
Do you think I should do a design for that one? Would you use it?

I meant for you to print onto your standard plain paper, not label stock Toby.
As you know, each label stock requires a label design, and that is always specific to paper sizes.

The times on your computer seem to be alarmingly slow compared to others.
6 mins on yours, 15 secs on mine, others around 1 minute. Needs investigation.

[bossgard]

George:

No, don?t make up layout for Avery #5267.
I was teasing you when you stated that you hoped you
?wouldn?t have to do labels with more than the 48? as in L4778.

#5267 is pretty small, but a nursery I had contacted about
labels a year or two ago, was using a clear 1-line label in the same size,
printed with laser, adhered to potstics, to mark their sale stock.
It was the first plant label sample I had collected for label research.

When I did printer test on L4778, I used both plain stock and
some excess label stock I had on hand. Wanted to see how
it registered on center of 8-1/2? width. It registered OK.

I think what I will do is wait and see how the time is on my computer
when you?re able to put RichText with some of the existing US layouts.
I don?t know if there will be any problem with speed with them,
but we will check it out. It must be in the RichText process itself,
because I don?t have any trouble in using the present US layouts.

Otherwise, I think my computer responds quite rapidly. It keeps up with me.

We?ll see . . . .

- Toby

[ideasguy]

I will do the 80 labels option at some stage, Toby.
I can see it being useful and I'd prefer to make the program work for it.

The L4778 has a fair amount of white space at the bottom. so thats probably why it worked on your US sheet size.
You wont have to use that, of course. We'll continue the project and have properly designed solutions for your US label stock.

You didn't report any delays when we tested Rich text on labels before.
In my analysis of the problem I concluded that the time taken is a direct multiple of the number of labels, and completely independent of the printer.