[bookport] Re: bookport suggestion
- From: "Walt Smith" <walt@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <bookport@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 15:01:18 -0500
The more functionality, the more complexity. The more complexity, the higher
the risk of error and failure. Anyone who knows anything about technology
should understand this fundamental fact. How many people have you ever heard
speak favorably of combined printer/copier/scanner/fax devices? There's an
excellent reason that people don't tend to favor them and that reason is
that when one function fails, the entire unit is almost always rendered
useless.
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Allen" <wd8ldy@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: <bookport@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, November 11, 2005 12:18 AM
Subject: [bookport] Re: bookport suggestion
Hi David and list:
So if such a nit can be manufactured that easily and cheaply with all the
functionality you outlined without reducing the degree of functionality book
port owners already enjoy, what's stopping you?Remember, many want a choice
of speech engines as well.
Cheers,
Dave
Other related posts:
