[bookport] Re: bookport needs a speaker:
- From: James Nuttall <jnuttallphd@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: bookport@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2005 14:19:59 -0700 (PDT)
Hello Bruce:
Since you guys seem to know something about technology perhaps you can answer
some of my concerns.
Over the life of the Double Talk synthesizer has it gone through some upgrades
in voice quality?
Are other people developing text-to-speech on a chip? I have found very limited
information on the internet. The Double Talk is often listed as about the only
product out there.
When I compare for example the Double Talk to the old DecTalk of my Kurzweil
system it sounds a lot better than the DecTalk. I'm just trying to gage the
development to text-to-speech on a chip. Someday I hope we will have also great
speech-to-text on a chip.
Jim -- Michigan
Bruce Toews <dogriver@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
I honestly fail to understand people's assertions that the suggestions I
made, or that even just the addition of more firmware space, would turn
the BP into a PDA or computer. I honestly believe that if people would
look at some of these suggestions they would see them for what they are,
extension of existing functionality. Newer technology tends to be more
battery-efficient, not less, and more firmware space would not require the
building in of fans into the system. I respect your cautionary approach
when it comes to updating the technology, and when I say that the BP uses
very old technology it is not at all a put-down. As I have said, I am a
huge fan of the Book Port, and am only interested in seeing a good thing
get better.
Bruce
--
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
On Tue, 6 Sep 2005, Chris Hill wrote:
> Hmmm, I wouldn't criticize the technology as being very old. Have you
> looked inside other consumer devices to see what they are using? I
> think you would be quite surprised. Many older processors get new
> lives in comsumer electronics and continue in production long after
> computers featuring them are in the landfill. Remember, this is a
> consumer electronic device, not a computer. We wouldn't like it if
> the battery had to be replaced daily or it needed a heatsink and fan
> just to read books now, would we?
>
>
> On Tue, 6 Sep 2005 11:44:03 -0500 (CDT), you wrote:
>
>> The reality of the situation, though, is that the BP is using very old
>> technology. A new unit is inevitable, dropping of support for the existing
>> unit may be a ways off, but that oo is inevitable. That is the way with
>> all technology, and the BP can't be isolated in that respect. I remember
>> when teh KPR came out. There was much excitement at the time because the
>> software came on a cartridge and could be updated. There was one upgrade,
>> after which Kurzweil abandoned the product. It's a reality we're going to
>> have to face, and we can either embrace it or go out screaming.
>>
>> Bruce
>
>
>
Other related posts:
