[bookport] Re: only feature I don't like
- From: "Lw" <LW105@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <bookport@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 7 Sep 2004 08:42:53 -0600
HI,
Agreed.
Hugs,
Beth
----- Original Message -----
From: "Barrett, Don" <Don.Barrett@xxxxxx>
To: <bookport@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 2004 7:44 AM
Subject: [bookport] Re: only feature I don't like
> Well, if we keep the max volume, at least make it a two-key sequence =
> held down for one beep. This would mostly eliminate the accidental =
> activation of this feature which has happened twice to me already. =20
>
> Don
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: bookport-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:bookport-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Steve Cutway
> Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 2004 9:20 AM
> To: bookport@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [bookport] Re: only feature I don't like
>
>
> Hi all:
>
> Well, I may be in a minority on this list but I happen to appreciate the =
>
> "maximum" and "Minimum Volume" features of the Book Port. I use them=20
> frequently because of working environments I find myself in and because =
> I=20
> sometimes use different speaker and/or headphone setups. While I =
> appreciate=20
> the inconvenience to some of having the volume raise or lower to its=20
> maximum or minimum when the respective keys are pressed and held, how=20
> inconvenient is it to quickly lower or raise the volume to a comfortable =
>
> level? So I for one would lament the loss of this feature. Perhaps it=20
> should be made harder to access, ie. pressing multiple keys, for =
> example,=20
> but it should remain in the product.
>
> Every time I read threads like this on lists like this, I wonder what=20
> percentage of the product user community is represented? It may be =
> higher=20
> on this list given the dependency of the Book Port on a computer to =
> receive=20
> files but I hope that the product designers will weigh all points of =
> view=20
> when considering whether to remove a feature that has been in the =
> product=20
> since day 1. No one uses every feature in a product and the wonderful =
> thing=20
> about today's computer-based technology is the design flexibility that =
> is=20
> possible. The Book Port is a well designed, well thought out product =
> with a=20
> rich feature set. Please don't reduce that richness to satisfy some =
> users'=20
> inconvenience.
>
> For the reasons already mentioned, I make a similar case for the help=20
> system. Larry has indicated it's on the features list and some in this=20
> group have argued against its implementation as less important than =
> other=20
> features. I happen to disagree. As I have said previously, it's the one=20
> feature the Book Courier has that in my view gives it a possible =
> advantage=20
> over the Book Port.
>
> There's an untapped market for the Book Port, the learning disabled=20
> community, the very market the Book Courier is designed for. In Canada,=20
> colleges and universities are quickly adopting the DAISY standard for=20
> alternate format textbooks which are used by students with learning=20
> disabilities as well as students who are blind. Unfortunately, we cannot =
>
> access the RFB&D DAISY collection so producers here are doing their own=20
> DAISY materials. As far as I know, the Book Courier doesn't yet support=20
> DAISY. I have shown my Book Port to LD students and service providers, =
> all=20
> of whom agree that they could use it, but all also say that it would be=20
> more helpful to them with the kind of help structure available in the =
> Book=20
> Courier.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Steve
>
>
>
>
>
Other related posts:
