I'd have to disagree here. The com to corn thing has been around for quite
a while. This is a commercial product, not freeware. With the prices that
Freedom Scientific charges, a bit of quality control is in order. I'm not
saying that the com to corn thing may not of had a valid reason once upon a
time, but as an end user, eliminating bugs and recognition errors should
take precedence over adding a bell or whistle. It seems to me the primary
reason for adding some features is to increment the software version thus
justifying a new release and requiring an upgrade rather than a patch.
Openbook 6.0 had an issue with hyphens, so they released 6.01. Did it fix
the problem? As far as I know it did not. I even heard at 1 point that it
had made the problem worse so they removed the patch from their ftp
sight. So what do we get now, we get Openbook 7.0 with the ability to
search online for e-books, a fax capability, and a photocopy feature, all
to the tune of a $120 upgrade fee for 6.0 users. Now my scanner came with
a copy program, Windows came with a fax program, and if I want to search
the web for a e-book, I'll either use a search tool, do it myself, but one
thing I won't do is use a OCR program.
What I would prefer to see rather than upgrades, are patches to take care
of existing bugs instead of introducing new ones along with new features.
Now this actually has nothing to do with the original issue I brought up,
but you got me going by saying a software producer has no responsibility
for the content of one of their software packages.
I use Openbook, I like Openbook, but I still would like to see some patches
that wouldn't cost money, and I would like to see the end users ditch that
com - corn, and that tom - torn, regardless of whoever was originally
responsible for their additions to the corrections dictionary.
Dave
At 12:18 PM 5/21/2004, you wrote:
All of our correction dictionaries as I understand them are a product of users who have found mistakes and added them for later corrections. So if a volunteer sends 75 contributions for a correction list and 1 of them turns out to be bad, it unfortunately reflects on the producer of the software.
I use K1000 and have added many entries to my corrections file - many of them are worth sharing, but time has shown me some are not, but this is not the fault of K1000 or OpenBook.
