I respect your opinion I also know that a device which lends its self
to versatility and greater utility would serve us well.
-- Jonnie Apple Seed With his: Hands-On Technolog(eye)s
On Sep 6, 2005, at 11:07 AM, Richard Ring wrote:
I wonder if it might not be a good idea to determine what a product does, and how it was intended to function before discussing what it cannot do. For instance, if I purchase an air conditioner, I don't expect it to cook my breakfast. If I purchase an I Pod, I don't expect that it will work with a Braille display. The Bookport may, like a Walkman, not have a speaker, but it has functionality that Walkmans only dream about. When you say many people haven't purchased Bookports because they don't support Braille, wireless, and have on-board storage, I believe that may be a case of assuming that your wishes are universal. The Bookport is not ever going to be all things to all people. Frankly, many of us appreciate the fact that it uses a storage medium that is easily replaceable. Second, to have the unit do all processing on-board would significantly increase battery life and size. Finally, it is not a network device, it is not intended to be one. Asking it to support wireless is like asking your washing machine to make waffles.
-----Original Message----- From: bookport-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:bookport-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of David Poehlman Sent: Monday, September 05, 2005 10:54 AM To: bookport@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [bookport] Re: bookport needs a speaker:
not a standoff but a conflict. Many people have not bought them because they don't support braille, they don't support wireless, they don't have onboard storage and they don't have a speaker. Why does pac mate have a speaker if it's so unimportant not to have one? How about braille note, braille sense and even laptops? Oh, you guys who think a speaker is necessary can just go pound peas. So What if the device talks. This brings up another matter. It'd be really cool if we could use the bp as a synth for our computers. Yes, with a speaker in it.
-- Jonnie Apple Seed With his: Hands-On Technolog(eye)s
On Sep 5, 2005, at 11:30 AM, Walt Smith wrote:
It's also a customer request to not add a speaker and that's a standoff.
----- Original Message ----- From: "David Poehlman" <david.poehlman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> To: <bookport@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Monday, September 05, 2005 11:20 AM Subject: [bookport] Re: bookport needs a speaker:
It could be small and still sound good. IIt could be on the back of the unit. It might make the unit a bit larger depending on design, but it would be hugely worth it and this is no opinion. It may well be a bad idea, but it is a customer request.
-- Jonnie Apple Seed With his: Hands-On Technolog(eye)s
On Sep 5, 2005, at 10:21 AM, Chris Hill wrote:
If the unit had a speaker, it'd be too small and you'd complain about how it sounded. It'd also make the unit larger, and I'd complain about that. The speaker idea is a bad one.
On Mon, 5 Sep 2005 09:00:39 -0400, you wrote:
When I examined a book port for several weeks beginning around memorial day, I was most put off by the fact that I had to augment the unit with something else before even beginning to use it. Yes, it's lovely, but no walk man that I know of costs 500 dollars. I know that the IPod and its kin require augmentation too, but we are talking about a classic need here and that is one of being able to hear the audio and for 500 dollars, you'd think we'd get something with a speaker in it.
Further on the discussion of what should be in the book port, I was disapointed that I could not just load something into the book port without yet another augmentation which granted like headphones was supplied but unnerving nonetheless especially if you need better headphones or an external speaker or a bigger card. I was fully informed and it was no surprise but the reality was a bit different from the knowing in advance. Were a speaker emplanted into the bp we could have error tones and other tonal indications augmenting our experience.
I'd love to hear the wisdom behind the current design other than perhaps better bat life and a more compact design?
Thanks!