[bookport] Re: the holidays and bookport
- From: "Richard Ring" <ring.richard@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <bookport@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 13:41:23 -0600
I believe that it is clear that the Bookport can have more features and
functionality than it currently does.
I also believe a survey of users would quickly show that there are
individuals who would like one feature, and individuals who would like
another.
How will APH and Springer Design determine what features to include in
the next generation Bookport?
One factor will most likely be cost. Many have stated that they would
like the Bookport to have the features one can have in an Ipod. Some
have asked for an internal hard drive, others have asked for a
full-blown note taker. Others have asked for an equalizer and so on.
One thing to keep in mind is that APH nor Springer Design have the kind
of R&D funding that Apple or Sony have. Nor will they ever sell as many
products as either of these companies. Realistically, if the Bookport
as it is currently constituted were a mainstream product, its price
would be considerably less than it is now.
Therefore, it stands to reason that if a hard drive, an equalizer, and
the recording functionality of a Plextalk were to be added, the price
would have to increase. Adding a digital camera would be one thing,
adding the software that would perform OCR would be quite another.
An Ipod is a mass market item, millions of them have been sold, and they
will probably sell a huge number as the US goes full swing into its once
a year buying orgy. I believe that the cost factor for each feature
will have a great deal to say about which features ultimately end up in
the next Bookport.
And I also believe as I have stated before, that many on this list will
be outraged when the cost goes up by several hundred dollars as it would
have to if all of the feature requests that I've seen on this list were
honored.
-----Original Message-----
From: bookport-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:bookport-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Angie Matney
Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2005 8:32 PM
To: bookport@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
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:
