[bookport] Re: In Defense of DoubleTalk...
- From: "Annette Carr" <amcarr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <bookport@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2006 20:20:52 -0400
I must say that I really love my BookPort. I was not happy about
DoubleTalk, but I quickly got used to it, and now I don't have a problem
moving between the various speech synthesizers.
Speech synthesizers have come a long way since the first RC SlotBuster in my
Apple Iie back in the mid 80's. Anyone interested in buying a loaded Apple
Iie?
Annette
-----Original Message-----
From: bookport-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:bookport-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Walt Smith
Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 7:14 PM
To: bookport@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [bookport] Re: In Defense of DoubleTalk...
Kevin -
Agreed. Given the choice, hardware is generally always preferable to
software (which is what I _think_ you meant to say), since you're
off-loading the heavy lifting from the microprocessor, itself, to an
external device. This is why I prefer using a router on my PC instead of any
software firewall. I remember back in the bad old days of DOS when a screen
reader, alone, would eat up anywhere from 10% to as much as 25% of the CPU
cycles and that's a _lot_ of overhead.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kevin Jones" <kevin@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <bookport@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 6:35 PM
Subject: [bookport] Re: In Defense of DoubleTalk...
hardware is always better than hardware especially when pushing a
computer to it's limits, but I guess most haven't realized that yet.
It's too bad th eonly 3 or 4 hardware synths are at least $500
Other related posts:
