Mary.Otten@p0.f1055.n261.z1.fidonet.org (Mary Otten) (04/13/91)
Index Number: 14838
[This is from the Blink Talk Conference]
I wonder why you prefer vocalize and the sounding board over artic?
Aren't the synthesizers based on the same chip? What do you like about
vocalize that you don't about artic? I'm kind of interested in finding
out about voczlvocalize. Know very little about it. I've got artic, and
have been under the impression that vocalize is, or at least used to be,
kind of a bear bolnes program, unless you were already a genius, writing
macros etc. One of the problems with this new version or atic artic is
that it is more complex, if more powerful than the old one. I guess
there are a lot of folks out there who would follow the kiss principle,
kee keep it simple stupid, and let me worry about learning the
application program and not the speech. Anyway, I digress from the
original subject. Still, with all the new versions of software coming
out, artic, asap and rumored new version of vocalize, I"d like to get a
comparrison going.
--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!261!1055.0!Mary.Otten
Internet: Mary.Otten@p0.f1055.n261.z1.fidonet.orgWilliam.Wilson@f89.n129.z1.fidonet.org (William Wilson) (04/13/91)
Index Number: 14842
[This is from the Blink Talk Conference]
MO> I wonder why you prefer vocalize and the sounding board over
MO> artic? Aren't the synthesizers based on the same chip?
Mary,
Although I am relatively a new Soundingboard and Vocal-Eyes user,
and there are many people more qualified to answer your questions than
me, perhaps even some guy named Geoffray, I have to give you at least a
few of my perceptions.
Yes, even though the Symphonix board and Soundingboard are based
upon the same chip, they do have some distinct differences. One of
these is the onboard ram the Soundingboard has that allows the text to
speech to be written there rather than to valuable dos ram, at least in
most cases. There are available several options with the Soundingboard
that, at least to the best of my knowledge, arn't present in the Artic
board. These include such things as hot keys, easily configurable to
your choice of key, for things like Hyperscan, time/date announcement,
silence key, rate, volume and tone changes, and a useful pause function
that actually works! Of course many of these things are available in a
speech program, but the advantages of having them available at the board
level are numerous. Again, despite the fact they are based upon the
same chip, and this is admittedly something that is sort of in the ears
of the beholder, I find the Soundingboard speech more understandible
than that of the Artic board. Not immensely of course, but since you
have the ability to easily change things like word and sentence delay
with the Soundingboard, a measurable difference in my mind. Also, there
is the really obvious, the fact the Soundingboard is locked to no
particular speech program, is supported by most speech programs, and
actually less expensive than the newest from Artic!
MO> that vocalize is, or at least used to be, kind of a bear bolnes
MO> program, unless you were already a genius, writing macros etc.
Wow, if this was ever the case, it most definately was way before I ever
looked at Vocal-Eyes! If there is anything that Vocal-Eyes is not, it
is bare bones!
Seriously, if I ever started posting about the features available
in Vocal-Eyes, and I'm just talking about the ones I'm familiar with,
this message could go on forever! Honestly, the best thing for you to
do is get a copy of the demo and take a look at it yourself on whatever
system you can! (Is your Artic board locked to Vest?) All I can tell
you is to set aside a lot of time to do this, cause there is an awful
lot to look at! I really don't feel comfortable pushing one speech
program that much over another here, but referring to Vocal-Eyes as bare
bones is so much an unrealistic image that I had to say something!
Give it a look Mary, cause I know you'll be glad you did!
Willie
... BlinkTalk, Dr. Deb and Silver in Pittsburgh!
--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!129!89!William.Wilson
Internet: William.Wilson@f89.n129.z1.fidonet.orgGrant.Downey@p0.f89.n129.z1.fidonet.org (Grant Downey) (04/13/91)
Index Number: 14858
[This is from the Blink Talk Conference]
This is the seccond of two messages about Vocal-Eyes and the
Soundingboard. Yes the Soundingblard is based on the same chip
as the Artic but a lot of improvements have been made. It has
more expresion than your artic board, the letters T P have more
expresion than the Artic boards. I just find the Soundingboard
a whole lot easier to underrstand but this is getting into
definite personal preference. When you look at total features
of the package, to me there is no better package than Vocal-Eyes
and the Soundingboard. My only criticism of the Soundingboard
is more because of my hearing instead of the board but it is
that the overall speech could be a little clearer. In other
words I could not say that the clarityof speech was near the
Dectalk or Vert Plus but its powerpack of features more than
makes up for the speech quality. It is those features that I
depend on to make my day to training and teaching, and personal
work so much easier. Grant
--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!129!89.0!Grant.Downey
Internet: Grant.Downey@p0.f89.n129.z1.fidonet.orgEric.Bohlman@p1.f778.n115.z1.fidonet.org (Eric Bohlman) (04/20/91)
Index Number: 15052
[This is from the Blink Talk Conference]
WW> level are numerous. Again, despite the fact they are based upon the
WW> same chip, and this is admittedly something that is sort of in the ears
WW> of the beholder, I find the Soundingboard speech more understandible
WW> than that of the Artic board. Not immensely of course, but since you
The quality of the speech from an SSI263 chip is highly dependent on the
software driver. The 263 has a rather large combination of (dynamically
variable) settings to control such things as intonation and the transitions
from phoneme to phoneme; a driver that uses these settings intelligently will
produce much better speech than one that just sets them once and leaves them
alone.
--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!115!778.1!Eric.Bohlman
Internet: Eric.Bohlman@p1.f778.n115.z1.fidonet.orgGrant.Downey@p0.f9.n381.z1.fidonet.org (Grant Downey) (04/20/91)
Index Number: 15057
[This is from the Blink Talk Conference]
In reference to Artic I have the old version of Artic at
present. It has no smart zones, or any other automatic screen
monitoring or hyper active windows, or anything like that.
After I got Artic I ran into Jaws which runs well with most
programs once it is set up. It has what is called automatic
frame monitoring meaning that you coulddesignate an area of the
screen to be monitored and when changes were made in that area
they would be automatically read to you. This is the first time
that I saw Word perfect and speech work well together. However
Jaws to me seemed sort of criptic but only because the command
structure was so different from anything I'd ever used before.
I'm used to it now. Last August however I got a demo copy of
Vocal-Eyes and to me it combines the best of the old and the
new. Vocal-eyes is one of the most advanced screenreading
programs out today. I got a program that worked, had no buggs,
and that I could learn to use in a farely short period of time.
Of course I had to sit down with manual but that is true with
any speech program. Vocal-Eyes also has screen monitoring or in
its case hyper active windows that are easy to define and set up
for programs. When combined with the Soundingboard Vocal-eyes
and the Soundingboard make a great team. The Soundingboard
offers in a speech sinthicizer many unique features such as the
ability to change rate and volume while it is talking without
having to into review mode, rewind analagus to the rewind of a
casette machine, fast forward, a pause control that allows youto
stop reading at any time and resume whereyouleft off, user
definable hot keys, and definable bufferrs and dictionaries. It
is a power packed sinthcizer for $395.00. I chose the
Soundingboard and Vocal-Eyes to use in my training
classesbecause for the comined price of $795.00 it was the most
power packed system I've seen. Again I've not seen Artic 3.03
yet. It's always fun to look at a new speech program but it is
going to be hard tofinda a product that can beat Vocal-Eyes and
the Soundingboard. Grant
--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!381!9.0!Grant.Downey
Internet: Grant.Downey@p0.f9.n381.z1.fidonet.orgMary.Otten@p0.f1055.n261.z1.fidonet.org (Mary Otten) (04/20/91)
Index Number: 15061
[This is from the Blink Talk Conference]
Well, Grant, I"m certainly not in aposition to cpmpare the 2 programs,
since I've never even seen vocalize. It sounds like the new versnion of
Artic has a lot of the features you were talking about that vocalize
already has, with the exception of changing rate volume, etc on the fly.
I guess my big argument at this time is the one artivficial intelligence
versus configuration type programs that I adressed in an earlier
message. I"d like to know how the configuration users know how to set up
their config files if they're having trouble figuring out a program in
the first place. I don't like the idea of having to understand a
program, that is an application program, inside out before you can set
up an intelligent configuration file to deal with it. How do you do that
with no sighted help when the application in question isn't working well
in the first place? Oh well. Off my soapbox. I know I've made that point
before. I wish more of you config guys would get over on Genie and enter
into dialog with Larry of microtali, author of the asap, artifiacial
intalligence based program. Thanks. I love this interchange of ideas.
Keep it going.
--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!261!1055.0!Mary.Otten
Internet: Mary.Otten@p0.f1055.n261.z1.fidonet.orgRick.Alfaro@f8.n369.z1.fidonet.org (Rick Alfaro) (04/20/91)
Index Number: 15071
[This is from the Blink Talk Conference]
MO> changing rate volume, etc on the fly. I guess my big argument
MO> at this time is the one artivficial intelligence versus
MO> configuration type programs that I adressed in an earlier
MO> message. I"d like to know how the configuration users know how
MO> to set up their config files if they're having trouble figuring
MO> out a program in the first place. I don't like the idea of
MO> having to understand a program, that is an application program,
MO> inside out before you can set up an intelligent configuration
MO> file to deal with it. How do you do that with no sighted help
MO> when the application in question isn't working well in the
MO> first place? Oh well. Off my soapbox. I know I've made that
MO> point before. I wish more of you config guys would get over on
MO> Genie and enter into dialog with Larry of microtali, author of
MO> the asap, artifiacial intalligence based program. Thanks. I
MO> love this interchange of ideas. Keep it going.
Hello Mary...
The artificial inteligence stuff sound great, but I wonder how
responsive the software is? With everything that is is looking for on
the screen, I am willing to bet that the program is on the sluggish
side. Ofcourse, I have no real way of knowing, since there is no demo
available, and the software will only work with 1 type of synthesizer!
That alone, is its biggest drawback! For whatever their reasons, they
are making the same mistake Artic has, but atleast Artic lets you
purchase a seperate software package that will allow the artic card to
work with other screen readers. I would never consider buying a package
that is limited to a proprietary configuration of software and
ahardware.
I have 2 machines here. One has a sounding board, and the other has an
old sonix sp200 card. I would never trade the flexibility of being able
to use Vocal-eyes in either machine, and if I go somewhere where I need
to use someone elses computer, I can freely take my Braille N Speak and
a floppy with Vocal-eyes on it and have instant access to their
computer. The absense of this flexibility would be absolutely
intollarable for me. This may not seem like such a big deal to you, but
it will when the time comes when you want to do something on another
machine.
I was onh Genie last night and read osme of the messages addressed to
and from microtalk. I remember Larry from the Apple days, and he is a
fine fellow, and I think he ha some very good ideas with his program,
however, he seems to have the idea that no other synthesizers can do
what the double talk can do with respect to auto reading and
interruptibility. This just isn't the case. There are several synths
out there that have indexing so that you can stop during autoread and be
right on the character or word you just heard. There are also several
programs out there that support an auto read mode, and support many many
types of synthesizers. Basing his support for only 1 synthesizer on
these incorrect assumptions is going to keep a lot of people from
purchasing his package. Sorry to bend your ear! <smile> I wanted to
make sure that you were aware of this very serious limitation and that
it isn't to be taken lightly. Great typing at you, and I hope when the
time comes, you will make the correct decision with respect to your
needs...
Regards,
Rick
--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!369!8!Rick.Alfaro
Internet: Rick.Alfaro@f8.n369.z1.fidonet.orgGary.Petraccaro@f90.n129.z1.fidonet.org (Gary Petraccaro) (04/20/91)
Index Number: 15081
[This is from the Blink Talk Conference]
Rick,
Two points on the ASAP program. First, there will shortly be an
external version of the Double Speak synthesizer, and second, the ASAP
program now supports Braille 'N' Speaks.
--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!129!90!Gary.Petraccaro
Internet: Gary.Petraccaro@f90.n129.z1.fidonet.orgGrant.Downey@p0.f9.n381.z1.fidonet.org (Grant Downey) (04/25/91)
Index Number: 15152
[This is from the Blink Talk Conference]
You bring out some very good points that I've really not
considered before. If you have a chance, Mary, perhaps you
should contact your Humanware representative to get a look at
the Mastertouch Demonstration program. It is revolutionary in
that it 1. is able to read from programs written directly to the
screen,and 2. because it uses a certain ammount of artificial
intelegence to determine what the user needs to know.
Unfortunately I've only seen it in demonstration and have not
gotten to sit down let's say for a week or two and sink my teeth
into it. However it has some potential. It's speech quality is
not what I expected and I think it has a long way to go as far
as development is concerned. However I suspect it is going to
be a big player in the market once it is out.
As far as Vocal-Eyes is concerned, to me it is no more difficult
to set up configuerations with windows than any of the others,
vert, Artic, Jaws, ETC. Each has their own format, and I just
happen to like the way Vocal-Eyes works. However Vocal-Eyes
gives the user total control over key definitions, and other
settings and in combination with the Soundingboard I feel it is
the most feature packed system for the price and even not for
the price in some cases because there is no other speech system
that has as many features as the Soundingboard. Vert or Pros
boards, Artic boards, and others are just talkers per say where
as the Soundingboard offers muchmore. Grant
--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!381!9.0!Grant.Downey
Internet: Grant.Downey@p0.f9.n381.z1.fidonet.orgGrant.Downey@p0.f9.n381.z1.fidonet.org (Grant Downey) (04/25/91)
Index Number: 15154
[This is from the Blink Talk Conference]
Today I received my Artic 3.03 upgrades since I'd purchased Artic's
Business vision after October the first and after spending severalhours
with it I'm favorably impressed. I'm glad that I'd seen some of the
pitfalls such as trying to use it with Procomm2.42 before hand though.
I had to redefine one heck of a lot of keys because Artic seems to use
the alt keys to excess. I havn't had time to mess with some of themore
complicated options however I have run Word perfect and it runs nicely.
However I'm still happy with Vocal-Eyes. This program is a real bear
especially to install. Maybe things will be better tomorrow. Just
some first impresions. Grant
--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!381!9.0!Grant.Downey
Internet: Grant.Downey@p0.f9.n381.z1.fidonet.orgTim.Lawrence@f432.n109.z1.fidonet.org (Tim Lawrence) (04/25/91)
Index Number: 15162
[This is from the Blink Talk Conference]
Hi, Mary.
I use Artic 215, with Business Vision 3.3, and find it to be a
vast improvement over version 2.10 of the software. I do however
think that they need to take more of an A I approach when designing
there program. If they did this I believe that Business Vision
would be in the same class with Asap, and Key note gold.
I haven't used Vocal Eyes, or heard mutch about it, so can't
realy comment on it.
I talked wi some one over at Artic, who said that there
beginning to take more of a A I approach to Business Vision, and
that there clearing up the bugs they have found. So far the bug
count is 28 in all.
REgards Tim.
* EZ 1.33 *
--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!109!432!Tim.Lawrence
Internet: Tim.Lawrence@f432.n109.z1.fidonet.orgRick.Alfaro@f8.n369.z1.fidonet.org (Rick Alfaro) (05/04/91)
Index Number: 15382
[This is from the Blink Talk Conference]
DA> Mary, I have been using Vocal-Eyes and ASAP both over the past
DA> couple weeks. You ask a good question. In part, experience
DA> helps you set up a good configuration. It can be hard to get
DA> it though. Secondly, most programs, including V-E come with
DA> pre-set configurations for common programs like WordPerfedct.
DA> Artic does too. You can study them for ideas. Finally, often
DA> you just have to go into review and carefully examine the
DA> screen. I was initially impressed with ASAP. It works with
DA> most things pretty well, but as I started using it for day to
DA> day work, I got increasingly annoyed. For some things, it is
DA> more chatty then I would like. For some programs with complex
DA> screens, it doesn't read things in the right order. It may
DA> read the bottom first. I presume that it has to do with the
DA> way the screen is updated. Larry may well be on to something,
DA> but it could be six months or a year before it is stable and
DA> reliable. With it doing the thinking, I don't always know what
DA> it is doing or why, so I might miss something and not even know
DA> it. Ultimately, the configuration/artifical intelligence thing
DA> probably won't be an either or thing, but we are in a
DA> transition time.
David,
I think you brought up some very pertinant and valid points with respect
to AI and ASAP. They don't offer a program demo, so I haven't had hands
on experience with the program, but I did however listen very carefully
to the demo tape. Even on the Demo tape, it was obvious that some lines
were getting repeated, and in some cases information was being read that
in my opinion didn't need to be. The solution for those cases where it
was talking too much or giving info in odd order is to configure the
program for that application. As you can see, the user is then back to
having to create a configuration anyhow! Like you said, Larry may very
well be on to a good idea, but it definately needs maturing. Even when
something like this does eventually get perfected somewhat, I don't
think there will ever be anything that will take the place of a real
good "custom" configuration.
I certainly understnd where users are coming from when they express the
opinion that they don't want to be bothered with configuring their
speech programs, as I know it sometimes can be frustrating. However,
having parts of the screen automatically read to you sometimes in
unpredictable order seems to me would in many cases cause uneeded
confusion. Going into some sort of review mode on the other hand to
examine a screen gives you information that can be easily interprated by
the user as you know exactly what you are reading and where it is on the
screen. Once you determine what exactly it is that you want read
automatically, it is just a matter of telling your speech program to do
it as part of your configuration. I know this is easier said than done,
but the various speech programs are getting better I think with repsect
to user friendliness with the exception of a couple of them. I know for
a fact that vocal eyes is definately getting friendlier and more
transparent to the user without loosing any of its power and
flexibility. Hopefully, other speech software packages are doing the
same, but artificial intelligence still has a long way to go I believe,
and in my mind, will never be a replacement for total configurability
and flexibility. The end result of a good configuration is an
application that speaks exactly what you want it to speak and when you
want it spoken. The key to this is to make this configuration as easy
to accomplish as possible and good down to earth documentation. No
matter how friendly a program is however, the user has to be willing to
put some time into it. I mean, we are talking here about a piece of
software that makes your day to day life much simpler and opens up
another window to the world, not a text adventure game or something like
that. I make it my business to know any speech program I use on a daily
basis inside out because it is probably one of the most powerful tools I
posess. Guess I got a little long winded here! <grin> Sorry!
Regards,
Rick
--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!369!8!Rick.Alfaro
Internet: Rick.Alfaro@f8.n369.z1.fidonet.orgMitch.Lynn@f8.n369.z1.fidonet.org (Mitch Lynn) (05/06/91)
Index Number: 15407
[This is from the Blink Talk Conference]
What do you mean that Vocal-Eyes is sluggish? I am running
Vocal-Eyes on a 16 mhz 286, and have found the program to respond
with great celerity. Perhaps WordPerfect is the culprit. I am
not currently running that maladroit program; however, I have in
the past. In fact, its slowness is one reason why I banished it
from my hard drive.
As for internal macros slowing down Vocal-Eyes, that is nonsense.
And comparing Provox to Vocal-Eyes is like comparing a skate
board to a Lamborghini. Well, at least they both have wheels.
Mitch
--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!369!8!Mitch.Lynn
Internet: Mitch.Lynn@f8.n369.z1.fidonet.org