What do you need a serial port for? I have a networking degree focusing on Cisco devices and if there isn't a serial port you simply access it by USB via a USB to serial adapter. Serial ports have been becoming more and more extinct. -----Original Message----- From: speakup-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:speakup-bounces at braille.uwo.ca] On Behalf Of Alex Snow Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2007 8:41 PM To: Speakup is a screen review system for Linux. Subject: Re: heretical thoughts was Re: Speakup dropped from Ubuntu the solution to that is usb->serial converters. I'm going to school for IT, and hope to get a job in networking at some point soon, so made sure the laptop I got had a serial port. While this wasn't the only deciding factor, it was pretty high on the list. I was willing to sacrafice some of the 8 or 16 serial ports on certain laptops (why would someone want that many USB on a laptop anyway)? for a serial port. On Tue, May 15, 2007 at 03:39:24PM -0500, Brent Harding wrote: > Well, what about that gear that is probably in service all around that > uses serial ports for administration? I was thinking of going back to > school for a networking-related career, and from what I gather, RS232 > could be the most important thing I could theoretically want on a laptop. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "C.M. Brannon" <cmbrannon at cox.net> > To: <speakup at braille.uwo.ca> > Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2007 1:24 PM > Subject: heretical thoughts was Re: Speakup dropped from Ubuntu > > > > Hi folks, > > I had a couple of observations that may not sit well with most of you ... > > > > Hardware synthesis is becoming obsolete. Why? More and more > > systems, especially laptops, are being manufactured without RS232 > > ports. When I buy my next laptop, I won't let the presence of RS232 > > be a determining factor. The vendors of USB synths won't release > > their product information, so these are unsupported. Thus, I'm not > > buying one. Who wants to do business with people like that anyhow? > > So it looks like software speech is the way of the future, at least for me. > > Next, software speech is more convenient, especially when using a > > laptop. You have to carry one less peripheral with you. > > > > The question to ask is this. Given the decline of hardware > > synthesis, is it really necessary to have speech support within the > > kernel itself? Software synthesizers run in user mode, so the > > benefits of a speech-enabled kernel -- notably a talking boot process -- are lost. > > > > Comments are welcome. > > > > PS. I'm not a GUI user, so I'm arguing from a console / command-line > > perspective. > > > > -- Chris > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 -- How do I type "for i in *.dvi do xdvi $i done" in a GUI? -- Discussion in comp.os.linux.misc on the intuitiveness of interfaces _______________________________________________ Speakup mailing list Speakup at braille.uwo.ca http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
