[bookport] Re: the holidays and bookport
- From: "David Tanner" <david-tanner@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <bookport@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 23:51:25 -0600
to give us color recognition. Now, when you figure that the memory on most of
the cell phones that are using it is pretty limited there might be a case for a
camera for color recognition or as a light probe. I think most any blind
person would think that a very nice little add-on if the price didn't go up
very much to include it.
You know what, maybe not the OCR due to memory constraints; but the people who
make the MobileSpeak speech software for cell phones have come up with a
software that uses the camera in a cell phone f
----- Original Message -----
From: "Angie Matney" <armatney@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <bookport@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2005 8:31 PM
Subject: [bookport] Re: the holidays and bookport
: Hi Mike,
:
: I agree, to a point. But just a few years ago, people were saying we didn't
need our blindness PDA's to play music
: either. Now, that is a standard feature of the MPower, the PacMate and the
Braille Sense. Personally, I could care less
: about a spell checker, because once that file is on my PC, I can handle it
from there. And since you must have a PC to
: use a BP (except for those wonderful library programs that lend them to
patrons), This seems reasonable. But I'm sure
: that the "Book Port" we use in a few years will have a spell checker and
perhaps a built-in digital camera for immediate
: OCR.
:
: I also see nothing wrong with wishing to have one gadget that does a lot. But
I hope others out there will remember that
: one of the most attractive features of the Book Port is its price tag. I want
my BP to do all that a $400 piece of
: equipment can do. I can't quite aford a Plextalk just yet, so I'd really,
really like it if my BP did everything a Plextalk would
: do! But I know this isn't likely. I don't want the BP to turn into a more
powerful but more expensive piece of access
: technology that is out of reach for many people. The BP has grown
tremendously in capability since I purchased mine a
: year and a half ago, and I haven't had to pay for an upgrade. I'm glad APH
implements features in such a way as not to
: comptromise the existing product.
:
: Just some ramblings from my sleep-deprived brain.
:
: On Mon, 28 Nov 2005 12:59:33 -0500 (EST), Mike Freeman wrote:
:
: ><<SOAPBOX ON>>
:
: >I'm sorry ... I've tried to hold my tongue, but ...
:
: >IMO the Book Port is for *reading*. Recording memos is a great adjunct
: >but is secondary to Book Port's primary purpose. Likewise with the
: >note-taking capability. Hence, I see no reason for the spell-check or
: >for a myriad of recording formats to be supported. If you want
: >spell-check, use a computer or Braille Note. If you want hi-fi
: >recording, use a PTR-1.
:
: >All the extra features add extra battery drain (ask Apple about battery
: >life problems with their latest I-pod!).
:
: >Itseems to me that APH engineers should "keep it simple, stupid";
: >simplicity means fewer software glitches and better battery-life. Let's
: >use the Book Port for the purposes for which it was designed and leave
: >the fancy stuff to others. And yes, I know; some of the other devices
: >aren't accessible. But that's not APH's problem!
:
: ><<SOAPBOX OFF>>
:
:
:
:
:
Other related posts:
