Ok this is rediculous Kevin for the simple reason that if any of this were possible and I"m still not there yet; there's nothing to be gain. I mean that in the sense that the overhead for such transactions over a netowrk would be prety large in my mind and I'm not a networking expert. If I understand your saying you could use a Linux box running SPeakup while sitting at a windows box and this alsa tool would allow you to use SPeakup on the windows box instead of a windows-based screen reader. If this understanding is correct, I submit to you this is useless. Why? Well its simple. If folks need a gui they could always use Gnome and Gnopernicus. If I correct in my understanding and folks still wanted to use SPeakup in such a fashion over a network, I still believe the overhead would be unreasonable. Besides all that, I think most folk would rather use a Linux box instead of a windows box. THere's nothing that can't be done on a Linux box that can be done on a windows box as far as I can tell. Your efforts would be better spent elsewhere. I still don't see this any of this being ore than a crock, but you sure made a lot of folk mighty upset because you didn't give us the information requested in the beginning. Oh and by the way, you can access files from a Linux box with windows by using Samba so your statements are just not making sense. I made up the bit above based on some incredible assumptions. Thanks I made these observations before my first cup of coffee, now I've taxed my few brain cells and most go load them up with coffee. I must not be awake yet. On Fri, Oct 24, 2003 at 10:33:32PM -0400, kevin wrote: > I used that as an ixample. Look at it this way. You work on redhat 9 in > some office, and I work on a windows machine. I want to comunicate with > your machine, but I want to use alsa to speek rather than that cursed jaws! > I would utelize parts of your system, access linux files and work with them. > Now, I could telnet, but I think you see the difference.
