Unrivaled on the Mac

ABBYY treated the Mac very neglected; FineReader for Windows is more powerful and is constantly evolving. Nonetheless, FineReader Express in my opinion the best thing is to have for the Mac. While there are almost no settings, but the detection rate is still neat. With the latest update, which was supposed to provide for compatibility to Lion, the processing speed has increased considerably (this is the setup menu has been the same throughout rationalized). With the retail version degenerates especially the first run of the text recording the waiting game, even on a Mac Pro. The update removes the waiting time is reduced to less than half. So it's worth to go right after installation on the ABBYY Web site and to get the update!

Strengths:
- Quick (but only after an update).
- In 'simple' text recognition performance is very good, even if they obtain in only fax quality.
- Highly stable. I have sensed the FR already more than 200 texts, some of them more than 100 pages long, and had no crashes or other 'incidents'. If I compare this with the wobbly stuff, whatever else is floating around from OCR programs for the Mac and is also often more expensive '

Weak points:
- Annoying registration procedure. The retail version annoyed the bargain by constant invitation, too, please register, although this is far from done. Even that is resolved by the update.
- There is not no way to specify at the outset which pages should be acquired and what. It is best, therefore, to produce in advance a PDF (or other document) that contains only the pages to be processed, because the subsequent sorting out pages in FineReader is very tedious!
- There is also no other configuration options; it is shipped to the specifications of ABBYY people.
- Poor keyboard control; you have too much select with the mouse.
- The recognition performance falls in texts with multiple fonts drastically. Handwriting is practically not recognized, even if they are very regular publication. Indexes and exponents are poorly recognized.
- When specifying the output format RTF, obtained though a page that resembles the original amazing straight away. But alas, we see on the layout! Since it teems with paragraph styles, etc. I drive generally better when I export the text as a bare TXT (UTF8) and even layoute, including indexes, italics, etc., rather than to eliminate all the oddities produced by the FR in the word processor and the to unify formats. In HTML format as a goal, it is of course worse. At least this weakness notify the FR but with different OCR programs.