Thats what What I thought. The newer bns and blt units have improved pronounciation over the echo, but the same sounding voice. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gregory Nowak" <greg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> To: <speakup at braille.uwo.ca> Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2002 6:42 PM Subject: Re: OLD DAYS > The legacy bns (that's what FS likes to call them now) and the echo speech synth sound the same because they share the same speech chip. > Greg > > > On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 05:27:28PM -0500, Adam Myrow wrote: > > If you can understand the Braille 'N Speak, you can understand the Echo. > > At least to me, they sound very similar. > > > > Yes, I remember BEX. It had those cryptic commands like " $$c " to center > > text. You absolutely had to put the spaces around them or they wouldn't > > work. I used it with an embosser called an Ohtsuki. Obviously made in > > Japan. It was a really slow embosser that could produce both Braille and > > print, but neither was very sharp. The Braille felt like the paper had > > been stepped on, and everybody said that the print was very faint like it > > needed a new ribbon even when it had a brand new one. It wasn't a ribbon, > > but a little rubber wheel and it had holes at the end of each page to > > detect the end of the page. Weird! > > > > I even used a shell account from an Apple IIGS and that was my first > > experience with Pine. That's why I still use Pine even though some say > > Mutt is better. It's hard to change when you've been using Pine that > > long. > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Speakup mailing list > > Speakup at braille.uwo.ca > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup > > _______________________________________________ > Speakup mailing list > Speakup at braille.uwo.ca > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup >
