From: Mark Conrad on 6 Sep 2009 20:37 In article <howard-475219.19091306092009(a)news.newsguy.com>, Howard S Shubs <howard(a)shubs.net> wrote: > Personally, I just figure Mr. Conrad is passionate > about the product. Darn Tootin, any tool which expands the capabilities of the Mac I am all for. Do you think the rest of these turds are $MS shills? ....just doing their best to keep Macs in 2nd place as regards speech recognition, like Macs have been for the past 25 years. Mark-
From: Mark Conrad on 6 Sep 2009 21:43 In article <060920091820259638%not(a)home.invalid>, John Steinberg <not(a)home.invalid> wrote: > Don't confuse wonder with care. > > For example, I don't care about MacSpeech or any > speech application for that matter Your choice. I also do not care about a lot of other applications, which is my choice. > and your attempts at popularizing it here > is apparently not going well. Correct, as do anyones attempts to popularize anything not associated with mainstream "accepted" applications such as multimedia, web surfing, or Apple Music Company. > Indeed, you may be turning off more people > than turning on. I _like_ to turn off narrow-minded people. The fewer of those we have around, the better off we all will be. Thinking people who know the value of a wide assortment of tools are the people I am posting for. The rest can buzz off. > Speech apps no doubt have their fans and uses... Oh they do, they do, one of the prime uses is in the medical business and everything associated with that business. So how does that affect you personally, not much, but it certainly will affect any children you happen to have, when Obama shoves through his latest screwy plan to put his hand deep in our pockets to the tune of a trillion dollars to pay for that plan. None of the dumb-o-crats have any detailed idea of *HOW* to improve the high cost medical fiasco. One of the prime wastes of money in this country is due to the fact that only 7% of US hospitals employ speech recognition, the rest stick to the expensive old fashioned chisels and clay tablets to keep records. Doctors I associate with would give their eye-teeth to switch to Macs for their medical record keeping. You would know why if you ever had to use Windows. > but this is a Mac system group > and thus your posting is off-topic. Yeah, you are right, only $MS has the sense to include speech recognition as part of their "system". Suppose that is why they enjoy 95% of the personal computer market, while Apple Music Company forever remains a bit player. Yeah, you are right, it is "on topic" to discourage acceptance of speech recognition on the Mac, like is being done in this thread. After all, if the Mac had viable speech recognition, all sorts of bad things would occur: Doctors/hospitals/medical-techs would buy easy-to-use and virus free Macs, Apple would prosper from added sales. Consumer medical costs would go down. Just for beginners they could cut their IT staffs by 90%, because Macs are easier to use plus do not need all the malware protection that PCs need. Doctors could get to know their families again, because of no need to stay 3 hours after their shift typing paperwork. The 200,000 "medical mistakes" and associated deaths annually in the USA would go way down, because a doctor would not have to "remember" the details of his 8 am encounter with a patient, at 10 pm that night, when he tries to remember what occured 12 hours earlier for his medical records. Then too, us humble "personal" computer users would benefit, even if we never used speech recognition. More Macs sold = more programmers for the Mac, which means a greater choice of software for all of us. We can't have that. Whatever would happen to the Apple Music Company if Macs became popular. Mark-
From: Michael Breslau on 7 Sep 2009 09:11 Mark, I am one who follows and appreciates your postings for what they are. Keep up the good work. My wife has pain if she tries to type. I'm her computer guru and have to guide her through learning Dictate 1.5 (even as I learn it myself to teach her...) As such, I'm grateful for every hint I can glean. Mike PS: I'm old enough to remember when newsgroups were free from name-calling and vituperation, and I wish it were still so today. Those who try to demean others in public wind up demeaning themselves.
From: Wes Groleau on 7 Sep 2009 10:34 Michael Breslau wrote: > PS: I'm old enough to remember when newsgroups were free from > name-calling and vituperation, and I wish it were still so today. Those > who try to demean others in public wind up demeaning themselves. Wow, you must be REALLY old. I'm 55 and I can't remember that. Then again, maybe that's because I'm 55. -- Wes Groleau achy breaky grammar http://Ideas.Lang-Learn.us/WWW?itemid=229
From: J.J. O'Shea on 7 Sep 2009 10:56
On Mon, 7 Sep 2009 09:11:09 -0400, Michael Breslau wrote (in article <mbreslau-7DCDD7.09110907092009(a)news.speakeasy.net>): > Mark, I am one who follows and appreciates your postings for what they > are. Keep up the good work. > > My wife has pain if she tries to type. I'm her computer guru and have to > guide her through learning Dictate 1.5 (even as I learn it myself to > teach her...) As such, I'm grateful for every hint I can glean. > > Mike > > PS: I'm old enough to remember when newsgroups were free from > name-calling and vituperation, and I wish it were still so today. Those > who try to demean others in public wind up demeaning themselves. You've obviously never been _near_ ngs such as, oh, talk.origins, if you think that what goes on here is particularly hot... or that if you think that there was ever a time when USENET was free of 'name-calling' and 'vituperation'. -- email to oshea dot j dot j at gmail dot com. |