beginning to think that JAWS 5.1 is more stable than 6
- From: "Ray Foret Jr." <rforetjr@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: <"Undisclosed-Recipient:;"@freelists.org>
- Date: Sun, 2 Jan 2005 12:46:13 -0600
Dear Tracey Jackson and JFW list,
After nearly a week or so with JAWS 6, and after having done 4
installations of JAWS 6 and reconfiguring manually all my settings each time
but the first two, and after having done quite a bit of browsing on the
internet, and after having experienced problems with how JFW version 6
behaves with Windows Messenger, and after having audio skipping issues with
JFW version 6 and not any of these issues with JAWS version 5.1, I am
beginning to come to the conclusion that JAWS 6 is quite a bit of a step
backward rather than forward. Some sluggishness still remains with my
keyboard, I still cannot resolve the Windows Messenger issues with names of
contacts signing in and not being announced without also having option 12
JAWS Messages turned on (this was not necessary with JAWS 5.1). Pages are
taking much longer to load with JAWS version 6 than they ever did with JAWS
5.1. There are just so many issues I have found that I may revert back to
JAWS 5.1. I'm willing to wait to see if the ILM version of JAWS version 6
behaves better than the Quella version of JAWS version 6 I'm now using; but,
if all of the behavior factors I mentioned above remain the same, I will
most likely switch back to 5.1. I'd kind of hate to do that because I'd
like to believe that FS. always moves forward with progress of this product.
It does seem to me, however, that, despite the best of advice which I have
had directly from FS tech support and from others who are very knowledgeable
about JAWS, many an issue yet remains with at least the Quella version of
JAWS 6. IF the ILM version of JAWS version 6 proves no better, I may revert
to JAWS version 5.1 upon installing my new hard drive. I still have a key
on floppy disk which I could use, however, if I do switch back to JAWS
version 5.1, would I be better off using the ILM version or just stick with
the Quella? If anybody else out there can shed some light on this matter,
I'd appreciate it very much.
Sincerely Yours,
The Constantly BAREFOOTED
Ray
Home Phone And Fax: (985)853-0139
E-mail and Windows Messenger:
rforetjr@xxxxxxxxx
God Bless President George W Bush
God Bless America
And God Bless Our Troops
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.298 / Virus Database: 265.6.7 - Release Date: 12/30/2004
--
To post a message to the list, send it to jfw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send a message to
jfw-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word unsubscribe in the subject line.
Archives located at: http://www.freelists.org/archives/jfw
If you have any concerns about the list, post received from the list, or the
way the list is being run, do not post them to the list. Rather contact the
list owner at jfw-admins@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: beginning to think that JAWS 5.1 is more stable than 6
- From: peter op 't Hof
- Re: beginning to think that JAWS 5.1 is more stable than 6
- From: Bruce Toews
Other related posts:
- » beginning to think that JAWS 5.1 is more stable than 6
- » Re: beginning to think that JAWS 5.1 is more stable than 6
- » Re: beginning to think that JAWS 5.1 is more stable than 6
- » Re: beginning to think that JAWS 5.1 is more stable than 6
- » Re: beginning to think that JAWS 5.1 is more stable than 6
- » Re: beginning to think that JAWS 5.1 is more stable than 6
- » Re: beginning to think that JAWS 5.1 is more stable than 6
- » Re: beginning to think that JAWS 5.1 is more stable than 6
- » Re: beginning to think that JAWS 5.1 is more stable than 6
- » Re: beginning to think that JAWS 5.1 is more stable than 6
- » Re: beginning to think that JAWS 5.1 is more stable than 6
- » Re: beginning to think that JAWS 5.1 is more stable than 6
- » Re: beginning to think that JAWS 5.1 is more stable than 6
- » Re: beginning to think that JAWS 5.1 is more stable than 6
- » Re: beginning to think that JAWS 5.1 is more stable than 6
- » Re: beginning to think that JAWS 5.1 is more stable than 6
- » Re: beginning to think that JAWS 5.1 is more stable than 6
- » Re: beginning to think that JAWS 5.1 is more stable than 6
- » Re: beginning to think that JAWS 5.1 is more stable than 6
- » RE: beginning to think that JAWS 5.1 is more stable than 6
- Re: beginning to think that JAWS 5.1 is more stable than 6
- From: peter op 't Hof
- Re: beginning to think that JAWS 5.1 is more stable than 6
- From: Bruce Toews