Well, an interesting point my man. I agree that windows2000 has a far from perfect speech accessable interface. What can I say? It's done using the microstuffed agent character merlin and the sam engine of the ms tts engine. man my mIRC client uses the learnout&hauspie true voice tts and I think it shits all over the microstuffed tts engine. but that's getting off the track. As for your point about sysadmins wanting to do the remote thing I will also conceed that software speech would be a great workaround. if I knew a little more about programming than I currently do, I'd have a go at it myself. Who knows? I'd probably make a good go of it. Shaun.. "Has anyone ever tasted an "END"? Are they really bitter?" EMAIL: shauno at goanna.net.au ICQ: 76958435 YAHOO ID: blindman01_2000 IRC NICK/SERVER: |3|1ndm4n on #aussiefriends on www.jong.com:6667 On Thu, 17 May 2001, Kirk Wood wrote: > Software speech can have a lot of other benefits aside from a laptop. I > know of at least two people who might be interested in working as a > network administrator. The problem is that sometimes you have to work from > a console and will need speech. Plugging in a synth when needed isn't > feasible, nor is leaving one connected all the time. > > Software speech is quite feasible. It isn't a perfect solution and few > have played it as such. It will one day be a good work around. This is why > macroslop has chosen to include rudimentary speech in winblows 2000. They > don't want to compete with the established market of screen readers > (yet). But they do want to give basic control to anyone. It is far from > perfect. But it is there. > > Another thing that this offers is a chance to benefit from increasing the > market for speech synthasis. Some people are using some built in tool to > have a document read to them. Kind of the you hear a mistake better then > your eyes see it thing. Software speech is the only way this is cost > effective. But it could expand the market and help drive down the cost of > a hardware synth in time. If nothing else, consider that within a few > years computers with the power for software speech will cost less and be > as small as the hardware synths of today. So who knows, perhaps the future > will be a "hardware" synth running linux. If that doesn't give pause, I > don't know what will. > > ======= > Kirk Wood > Cpt.Kirk at 1tree.net > > Nothing is hard if you know the answer or are used to doing it. > > > _______________________________________________ > Speakup mailing list > Speakup at braille.uwo.ca > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup >
