[bookport] Re: Interesting rumor
- From: "Grant Hardy" <grant_hardy@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: <bookport@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2007 19:00:02 -0800
My BP has served me very well and I definitely think it is a fantastic piece of
technology. But I do see your point in some respects: the keys, though I have
certainly not pounded them, are beginning to get harder and harder to press,
and I do agree that the transfer software's handling of HTML files, web pages
and word documents is very crude. I was also sad to hear that there will not
be a "trade-in" or "upgrade" program for the next generation of Book Ports.
But frankly, no product is going to be perfect--and the Book Port's definitely
served me well. I have far less complaints with it than I do with my screen
reader, my notetaker...and hey, mainstream technology isn't perfect either! So
good job APH with your bookport; but having said that, I don't follow the
belief of other listers that a device like this is *absolutely, 100%
perfect--and any flaw brought to the attention of the list is rude, pointless
or otherwise.
----- Original Message -----
From: James Jolley
To: bookport@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2007 4:42 PM
Subject: [bookport] Re: Interesting rumor
Hi,
It will be interesting to see what APH come up with, because personally, I
find that the Bookport is rather badly designed. It's tacky rubber keys for
a start have lead me to have to question that decision when they designed
the unit. One wonders wether or not they suspected that longevity wouldn't
be an issue, and as usual as blind individuals, we have to make yet another
purchase to keep up with the joanses as it were.
Secondly, my unit has developed a rather interesting problem in that the
left channel drops out periodicly. This is plain rediculous as it's never
been dropped or anything. The entire design of the board is suspect in my
view.
I don't deny that the software that allows one to transfer files is ok, but
it's not quite as sophisticated as we are lead to believe. For instance,
when transfering HTML files, the system is unable to read tags for headings
and so on, rather pointless. What always interested me is why APH didn't
parce the HTML directly, instead of having to rely on word for it's output?
Also, why should one be required to use a secondry daisy reader, when surely
good programming practice would have the book port transfer include an
appropriate DLL with the appropriate library functions to accomplish those
tasks?
To be absolutely honest, I have had no end of trouble with my unit. I've
sent it back to our destributer in the UK, had it repaired, and after 9
months of use, it is faulty again. One wonders wether springer's design team
took into acount how mutch these units would be used.
Interestingly, I own a Book courier also, and although not as feature ritch,
it's overall design is significantly better, plus I have had no problems
with my unit.
What do people think? I am naturally expecting the usual that goes on on
most blindness lists, the inevitable winers, but here's hoping eh?
-James-
-----Original Message-----
From: bookport-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:bookport-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Richard Ring
Sent: 17 January 2007 22:49
To: bookport@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [bookport] Interesting rumor
Greetings all:
I have heard the following interesting rumor. The current Bookport (at
least the hardware) was a joint effort between APH and Springer Design Inc.
The rumor that is making the rounds is that the Bookport 2 is being designed
by a joint effort between APH and a company called Levelstar, whose current
product offering is a device called the Icon, which is a rather interesting
Linux-based PDA.
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.16.13/632 - Release Date: 16/01/2007
16:36
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.16.13/632 - Release Date: 16/01/2007
4:36 PM
Other related posts:
