My HP 3200C scanner worked well with my Win 98se & AMD 800 with 128mb RAM.
It became necessary to replace the AMD motherboard with a Celeron 2.4 with 768meg RAM.  Also changed OS to XP Home sp2.
After changing the OS, it was necessary to update the HP 3200C driver, which I did.
The scanner connects to a parallel port.
It now requires 2 minutes 45 seconds to scan a photo - PROBABLY 5 times longer that with the old 'puter.
Is there any hope to make it a little quicker?Is it compatible with your computer? have you checked with the manufacturer for support?

[glb]Flame[/glb]jimquist..... You should have a look on driverguide.com for any drivers for that scanner designed for XP .........then you will probably get an improvement in the scan time .....

dl65  HP no longer offers free support on this 5 year old scanner but they DID provide a Driver for the scanner to use with XP.
I wouldn't know where to ask, but since they went so far as to make a driver for the HP 3200C to run on XP and since Celeron processor is not something terribly wierd, I would [glb]assume[/glb] that it is compatible with my computer.
thanks for your thoughts
jimjimquist...... I just went to the site , driversguide.com , the one I suggested you look at and there are quite a number of drivers for that scanner  on Win XP ..........Which driver are you using .......because one or more of these may work better ........

dl65  Hi  dl65
I looked at the driverguide.com site.  Don't know how one would determine if the drivers shown would be better or not and whether they are to be trusted.
I am using the driver downloaded from HP:
sj648en... Release Date: 2004-09-01  Version: 2.0
40.2 MB
Looking kind of glum     Off to beddy-bye - maybe tomorrow will be better.  Thanks again.
Jim jimquist.... Why dont you give a few of them a try ....
You may find one that works better than what you have.
If you dont LIKE the way they work ...just roll back to the one your using now ......


dl65  You should check all of your scanner settings in case you or something altered them.I am not very knowledgeable when it COMES to scanners, but is it possible that you have set the scanner to conserve POWER rather than warm up quickly?