[bookport] Re: Progress and the Book Port
- From: "Walt Smith" <walt@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <bookport@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2005 08:56:56 -0500
I agree with every word you say here, Rich. There's this mindset that holds
that old is always no good and new is always improved and that's simply not
true. The idea that those of us who don't want the BP turned into a
Christmas tree are some kind of Luddites is insulting and I'm about to start
placing mail blocks on those persons who refuse to accept the idea that this
is something that reasonable BP users can disagree about without
degenerating into name-calling and sarcasm.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Ring" <ring.richard@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <bookport@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, December 09, 2005 4:45 PM
Subject: [bookport] Re: Progress and the Book Port
I am getting quite tired of aspersions being cast at people who don't
want to turn the Bookport into a Braille 'n Speak.
There are many changes that would make the Bookport a better unit.
However unless we completely rebuild the system, it will not meet the
needs of students who need a real note taking device. One huge group of
individuals who would never wish to use the Bookport as a primary note
taker are those who do not use Braille. Unfortunately, the majority of
those who are blind do not know and use Braille, therefore if such
individuals were to own a note taker, they would prefer one with a
qwerty keyboard. That would certainly change the overall portability of
the device. To compare the Bookport's note taking capabilities to a
Braille Note or a Pac Mate displays a clear and profound lack of
knowledge concerning the functionality of these devices.
Students with whom I work want a notetaker that can read MS-Word
documents, and they want the ability to save documents in that format.
They want the ability to create contact lists, and an appointment
calendar. They want the ability to browse the web, and the ability to
read html documents. Professionals want the ability to synchronize
email, appointments and contacts with their PCs, just as sighted
professionals do with their PDAs.
Can the Bookport do these things? Should it do these things? And, if
it does, will APH still offer the device at $400 US? I don't have the
answers, but as someone who teaches note takers every day, I can tell
you that none of the individuals I work with would want to go back to a
Braille 'n Speak!
Some prefer the Braillenote, some the Pac Mate, but I never receive
requests from college students to learn how to use the Braille 'n Speak!
Frankly, the majority of the individuals that I serve don't even know
computer Braille, although it is not all that difficult to learn.
Here are some changes that I wouldn't mind seeing, and they have nothing
to do with note taking.
I would like to see USB 2.0 support. I would like to see the 256 mb
limit for audio files done away with. I would like to see an MP3 shuffle
mode, I wouldn't even mind giving the transfer tool the ability to
create play lists. I would like support for CF cards of greater than 4
GB, and I would like to see support for type II CF cards (microdrives).
I would also like to see real html support, so that if one had a book in
html format that book could be read as it was intended. To be read.
Many books allow the reader to go immediately to an item in a table of
contents, because each item is a link. Support for this would be an
excellent improvement.
I would also like to see an internal hard drive although that would
probably add a bit to the cost.
I would also like to see SD card support.
However, as someone who can make recommendations to clients, I would
never tell a client that he/she could use the Bookport as a note taker!
It would be like telling someone a hot dog was a steak!
Before we add features, let's fix some of the bugs that have been
reported to this list. Bug fix releases aren't as slick and sexy as
releases rich in new features, but I'd rather fix the roof on my house
before I built a recording studio on the second floor, it would just
make solid sense.
-----Original Message-----
From: bookport-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:bookport-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Bruce Toews
Sent: Friday, December 09, 2005 2:18 PM
To: bookport@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [bookport] Progress and the Book Port
One of the recurring topics on this list is that of feature suggestions
and why they should or should not be implemented. People have very
strong
viewpoints on this issue, and they tend to polarize users into two
camps,
two camps which rather vehemently oppose each other. One camp views the
BP
as a complete solution as is, and feel very strongly that no changes
should be implemented, as making such changes would dilute the existing
features, or add new functionality that opposes the BP's original
purpose.
A classic example of this is something I saw on a list for the Book
Courier, in which one person said that what makes the Book Courier so
much
better than the Book Port is the fact that it doesn't have a note-taking
feature, as the Book Port does.
The other camp, the camp to which I personally subscribe, feels that the
Book Port is a great unit, and that great things can be made even
greater,
that the truly great products continue to evolve. Anyone who saw the
Braille 'n Speak evolve before Blazie Engineering was swallowed up by
Freedom Scientific will know what can be achieved through this sort of
thinking. The eveolution of the computer, once thought of as only useful
for crunching numbers, is another. People in this second camp believe
that
the Book Port, too, can be such an example.
Over the course of its existence, the Braille 'n Speak became more
powerful, more flexible, more versatile, and it did so while battery
life
increased as opposed to decreasing. It outgrew the limitations of just
being a notetaker, while at the same time staying true to the needs of
that original purpose.
One of the arguments I hear again and again is that the Book Port is a
book reader, and it should not be anything else. This is the path taken
by
the Book Courier, and there's nothing wrong with it. But APH has seen
fit
to expand the usefulness of the unit. It has flown against the
conventional wisdom which says that, if you want a notetaker, you ahve
to
shell out thousands of dollars to do it. This probably irritates some
of
the people who have been in the business of either designing, selling,
or
procuring the multi-thousand-dollar notetakers, becasue the Book Port is
available for a few hundred dollars, and for it to seriously rival one
of
the "big boys" would seriously challenge the conventional wisdom, and
force those who claim that you need to fork over thousands for a decent
notetaker to seriously rethink those claims. It's not a lot of fun to
find
the book from which you've been preaching for years to be totally
discredited. The flat-earth hold-outs are still struggling with it.
Another argument against increased functionality is that increased
functionality yields increased bugs. My only answer to this is: Nothing
ventured, nothing gained.
Another argument suggests that the long life of batteries would be
compromised by increased functionality. I submit that my current
cellphone
lasts twenty times longer than did my first on one battery charge, is
much
more powerful, is smaller, and much faster. My Braille Lite M20 lasts at
least ten times longer on a charge than the first braille 'n speak, is
only slightly larger (and this because of the addition of the braille
display), is much faster, and much more versatile and efficient. People
seem to forget that technology has come a long way since the original
technology behind the Book Port was introduced: it's faster, it's
cheaper,
it's more efficient, and consumes less, not more, power.
Finally, I suggest that if one likes things the way they are, one is not
obligated to turn in their unit. If you don't want the new progress,
fine,
but why stop the rest of us? Is there insecurity among some because they
have always felt at the forefront of technology, but now don't want to
move on, yet they still want to be at the forefront, so the best way of
handling that insecurity is to stop the progress so they'll remain at
the
forefront without moving? I can relate to this. I wanted to stay with
Dos.
I wanted efforts to make Windows speak to be quelled so I could stay at
the forefront of technology without moving. Eventually, I grew up and
moved on, and I'm glad I did.
The basis for the Book Port is exciting. But I truly believe that, in
the
future, if we can replace some 1990's technology and some 1990's
thinking
with some 21st-century technology and thinking, the opportunity exists
to
keep the Book Port what it once was: a device which does what it wasn't
thought could be done, affordably, and efficiently. It's a wonderful,
fabulous unit. But the talking MP3-players are whizzing past it, or at
least preparing to. Others are innovating. The Book Courier is sticking
to
its roots. The Book Port has the potential to take flight with the rest.
Finally, whether or not any of this happens is not our decision,
ultimatelhy. It's APH's. I honestly belive that these people know what
they're doing; they know if an idea is doable; they know what's
realistic
and what's not; they know what the Book Port can become and what it
can't.
End of lecture. <GRIN>
Brce
--
Bruce Toews
E-mail and MSN/Windows Messenger: DogRiver@xxxxxxxx
Web Site (including info on my weekly commentaries): http://www.ogts.net
Info on the Best TV Show of All Time: http://www.cornergas.com
Other related posts:
