3 ms·

There is a massive industry, sets of standards, and infrastructure relying upon barcodes. For example, anyone who does ships product to their partners as part o

by teilo 6y ago

There is a massive industry, sets of standards, and infrastructure relying upon barcodes. For example, anyone who does ships product to their partners as part of an EDI/X12 workflow utilizing advances shipping notifications, will need to be able to generate a UCC compliant shipping label. Warehouse management systems, same story. In fact, in supply chain, QRCodes are extremely rare. All the portable "brick on a stick" wireless terminals rely upon barcodes. Production workflow, where jobs move from station to station often rely on barcodes to identify jobs and components. Not to mention the most obvious one: shopping. Cash register scanners don't do QRCode. They follow the UPC standard along with the entire retail industry. That's likely never going to change.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
edoceo 6y ago
Hmm, a lot of the in-store imagers/readers are 2D capable now (eg: readers at HD and Kroger in USA). Not all, but when these facilities get a hardware refresh they get 2D - but still have nothing to read. Scanners have to be deployed first, then 2D can move to on-package
- teilo 6y ago
  No, it's just not that simple. It's not a question of what readers are capable of. It's multiple universal standards that would have to change, and for what? Packaging has a bad enough time with UPS codes getting distorted to the point of being unreadable, and that would be even worse with 2D codes. Furthermore, 2D codes take longer to decode. 1D scanners are able to scan the entire surface of an object to find the codes quickly, or even two surfaces at the same time. Think cashiers again, quickly plowing through a cartload of merchandise. They don't have to aim to do that. They just have to know what side the barcode is on. It's a non-trivial engineering issue to make 2D as efficient to scan as 1D. There is absolutely no reason to move to 2D codes for the majority of existing 2D applications.

by teilo 6y ago

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

edoceo 6y ago

Hmm, a lot of the in-store imagers/readers are 2D capable now (eg: readers at HD and Kroger in USA). Not all, but when these facilities get a hardware refresh they get 2D - but still have nothing to read. Scanners have to be deployed first, then 2D can move to on-package

teilo 6y ago
No, it's just not that simple. It's not a question of what readers are capable of. It's multiple universal standards that would have to change, and for what? Packaging has a bad enough time with UPS codes getting distorted to the point of being unreadable, and that would be even worse with 2D codes. Furthermore, 2D codes take longer to decode. 1D scanners are able to scan the entire surface of an object to find the codes quickly, or even two surfaces at the same time. Think cashiers again, quickly plowing through a cartload of merchandise. They don't have to aim to do that. They just have to know what side the barcode is on. It's a non-trivial engineering issue to make 2D as efficient to scan as 1D. There is absolutely no reason to move to 2D codes for the majority of existing 2D applications.