user auth vs account track

[rrrohan]

Setting up a customer for print tracking.

they dont care about tracking copying for some reason only printing so i figured User Authentication was best as it would allow public user access at copier.

i was trying to see if account track was more detailed with what it kept records of but it doesnt appear to be.

whats the point in running them both at same time?

as far as i can tell both provide security and tracking.

[mincopier]

Really no reason to run both. The biggest difference is that one will allow "Public" user access and the other will allowed "Password" only for access. Other than that they will both track the same information as far as I can tell.

[copyman]

Setting up a customer for print tracking.

they dont care about tracking copying for some reason only printing so i figured User Authentication was best as it would allow public user access at copier.

i was trying to see if account track was more detailed with what it kept records of but it doesnt appear to be.

whats the point in running them both at same time?

as far as i can tell both provide security and tracking.

I thought with authenication you needed to add an accessory like a card or thumb reader, where account track can be done without any optional accessories?

[bsm2]

Account track would be the way to go. I personally don't like either unless there using it to bill back departments or users for prints. As it generates unnecessary service calls do to user errors.

[copier addict]

I thought with authenication you needed to add an accessory like a card or thumb reader, where account track can be done without any optional accessories?

No, user authentication can be used without any hardware being added. And it does allow for walk up users with limited or full access to functions.

[tsbservice]

Really no reason to run both. The biggest difference is that one will allow "Public" user access and the other will allowed "Password" only for access. Other than that they will both track the same information as far as I can tell.

Agree they both track same info. However UA has some more options/features to configure than AT. Depending on a customer requirements you can deside which one to choose UA or AT.


Account track would be the way to go. I personally don't like either unless there using it to bill back departments or users for prints. As it generates unnecessary service calls do to user errors.

Missed old analog days;) few buttons, no additional softwares...but also customers are dumb, spoiled and more lazy nowadays.

[emujo2]

Account Track..+ Ability to require password only (Big + where users whine about extra steps) minus is each account track account has defaults that may need to be changed
User Auth..Can be tailored for public user (PU can be configured to allow various items w/o logging in ie copy, copy in color, print, fax user box, external memory)

Why would you use both...

Only when you are setting up groups that have a max allowed usage per given period (not really a period, must be administratively reset by PSWC admin..


So you enable user auth and account track..and set up to synchronize (or just sync to user)
Now you create a marketing group and give that group limits (if required)
Next you build users and add them into the marketing group..Repeat for additional groups.

Users would print and input user password (and if not synchronized, marketing password)

As other user print/copy the marketing group allowance gets used up and printing/copy is halted.

very convoluted and 3rd party software does a much better job..E

[blackcat4866]

I've only had a couple customers with both, and the complexity is maddening, even when you know how to use it. I would strongly discourage the "both" approach, only because all your effort will be tossed out the window in a couple weeks when they get tired of it. =^..^=

[ivovb]

I would give an example of using both methods at the same time. Let's take a lawyer firm.

First of all they need User Authentification (UA), because they have to control (eg who is using the resurce), restrict (eg how much is using the resurce - b/w, color, scan, fax etc), how it is used - what exactly is printed, scanned etc. Generally You have several metods to implement UA. Internal server (IS) - You can set user name and password for each user - it is cheap almost cost free, but has no all the options as explained above and quite annoying to input your user+pass every time. External server (ES) + card reader/vein reader... - You need external server+add software like SafeQ/Paper Cut; You get all of the options and far away from annoying system. You can track all of the in/out info concerning industrial espionage... And off-course it is most expensive. And You get as a plus follow-me-print functionality. Both methods IS/ES give You secure print functionality. Some kind of compromise is LK-114. Quite buggy, but cheaper than ES and of-course less options than ES.

Secondly when several lawyers works on several cases firm will need to know info like user #1 + user #4 are working on case #3. Here is the place for accout track (AT) - case #3. Now they know haw much to charge the customer having case #3 for printing/copying/scanning/faxing that user #1 + user #4 have made on case #3.

For almost 24 years in copy business I have only one set-up of UA IS + AT. No other combination.

BR

PS This is the short version. Home lockup... ;-)

[tsbservice]

I would give an example of using both methods at the same time. Let's take a lawyer firm.

First of all they need User Authentification (UA), because they have to control (eg who is using the resurce), restrict (eg how much is using the resurce - b/w, color, scan, fax etc), how it is used - what exactly is printed, scanned etc. Generally You have several metods to implement UA. Internal server (IS) - You can set user name and password for each user - it is cheap almost cost free, but has no all the options as explained above and quite annoying to input your user+pass every time. External server (ES) + card reader/vein reader... - You need external server+add software like SafeQ/Paper Cut; You get all of the options and far away from annoying system. You can track all of the in/out info concerning industrial espionage... And off-course it is most expensive. And You get as a plus follow-me-print functionality. Both methods IS/ES give You secure print functionality. Some kind of compromise is LK-114. Quite buggy, but cheaper than ES and of-course less options than ES.

Secondly when several lawyers works on several cases firm will need to know info like user #1 + user #4 are working on case #3. Here is the place for accout track (AT) - case #3. Now they know haw much to charge the customer having case #3 for printing/copying/scanning/faxing that user #1 + user #4 have made on case #3.

For almost 24 years in copy business I have only one set-up of UA IS + AT. No other combination.

BR

PS This is the short version. Home lockup... ;-)

Sounds maddening at best :)
Will take the lesson from BC, never ever use them both.

[ArrowGB]

I would give an example of using both methods at the same time. Let's take a lawyer firm.

First of all they need User Authentification (UA), because they have to control (eg who is using the resurce), restrict (eg how much is using the resurce - b/w, color, scan, fax etc), how it is used - what exactly is printed, scanned etc. Generally You have several metods to implement UA. Internal server (IS) - You can set user name and password for each user - it is cheap almost cost free, but has no all the options as explained above and quite annoying to input your user+pass every time. External server (ES) + card reader/vein reader... - You need external server+add software like SafeQ/Paper Cut; You get all of the options and far away from annoying system. You can track all of the in/out info concerning industrial espionage... And off-course it is most expensive. And You get as a plus follow-me-print functionality. Both methods IS/ES give You secure print functionality. Some kind of compromise is LK-114. Quite buggy, but cheaper than ES and of-course less options than ES.

Secondly when several lawyers works on several cases firm will need to know info like user #1 + user #4 are working on case #3. Here is the place for accout track (AT) - case #3. Now they know haw much to charge the customer having case #3 for printing/copying/scanning/faxing that user #1 + user #4 have made on case #3.

For almost 24 years in copy business I have only one set-up of UA IS + AT. No other combination.

BR

PS This is the short version. Home lockup... ;-)

Coming back to this (years later, I apologize), I have a realty client who wants to know which User printed to which Account, as well as how much they printed. Is there a log within the machine or web connect page that will allow you to reference which User Authentication accounts print to which Account Track accounts, as well as the quantity printed? I only see separate counter printouts for User Auth. and Account Track.

[emujo2]

The short answer, yes..however, if there are output limits ie 2K per month and these have been reset, then any info before the reset would be deleted as well. PSWC/Maint/export is where you want to be to export your counter info..Export it as CSV file to allow you to manipulate it easier in Excel. E

[ArrowGB]

The short answer, yes..however, if there are output limits ie 2K per month and these have been reset, then any info before the reset would be deleted as well. PSWC/Maint/export is where you want to be to export your counter info..Export it as CSV file to allow you to manipulate it easier in Excel. E
Thanks for the reply! I'm familiar with exporting the counter data within pagescope; however, I'm more so looking for something that resembles a job list. The client wants to track which staff members in the office are printing/copying to certain account track accounts. I was curious as to whether or not there's counter data that will let me know "user 1" printed/copied x amount of pages to "account 1", rather than just "user 1" made x amount of copies and prints. I'm slowly coming to the conclusion that this feature may not exist. Let me know if I'm missing something here.