From: Mark Conrad on
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
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
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
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
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.