No, I hate it and while it is my understanding you can get elocrap I mean vio voice speech for linux if you pay for it, I don't see the voices available independantly for viavoice for any platform.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Jacob Schmude" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "General discussions on all topics relating to the use of Mac OS X by theblind" <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, November 03, 2008 2:07 PM Subject: Re: what we have to contend with:Fw: From today's Tech Update Does it even include the voice or is it just dictation? Just an idle question: Am I the only one who didn't like eloquence? :) On Nov 3, 2008, at 09:20, David Poehlman wrote: > good luck finding it. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Will Lomas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "General discussions on all topics relating to the use of Mac OS > X by > theblind" <[email protected]> > Sent: Monday, November 03, 2008 11:36 AM > Subject: Re: what we have to contend with:Fw: From today's Tech Update > > > it is like eloquence if i can use that with voice over superb > where do i get it > > On 3 Nov 2008, at 15:08, David Poehlman wrote: > >> is it free? if not, it is one of the most horrible speach I have >> ever heard >> so I wouldn't purchase it. How well does it respond? >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "M AUSTEN" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: "General discussions on all topics relating to the use of Mac OS >> X by >> theblind" <[email protected]> >> Sent: Monday, November 03, 2008 10:04 AM >> Subject: Re: what we have to contend with:Fw: From today's Tech >> Update >> >> >> Hi, >> >> If anyone is interested, IBM's ViaVioce has been for some time and >> still >> available for Mac. >> >> Mark >> >> >> --- On Mon, 3/11/08, David Poehlman >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> From: David Poehlman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> Subject: Re: what we have to contend with:Fw: From today's Tech >>> Update >>> To: "General discussions on all topics relating to the use of Mac >>> OS Xby >>> the blind" <[email protected]> >>> Date: Monday, 3 November, 2008, 2:22 PM >>> Though it is not always mentioned, when the os is updated, >>> something about >>> vo gets updated as well because there is so much in the os >>> that is reflected >>> in vo. >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "Dan Eickmeier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> To: "General discussions on all topics relating to the >>> use of Mac OS X by >>> theblind" <[email protected]> >>> Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 11:43 PM >>> Subject: Re: what we have to contend with:Fw: From >>> today's Tech Update >>> >>> >>> I agree with what people have said here about the mac and >>> voiceover. >>> You spend the money on a mac, you get VoiceOver, and as the >>> OS is >>> updated, Voiceover may get updated as well. No haveing to >>> pay every >>> couple of years to maintain a JAWS or window-eyes SMA,and >>> if the oS >>> gets updated, no waiting for updates to the screen reader >>> either. On >>> Nov 2, 2008, at 3:02 PM, David Poehlman wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>> From: "Gene" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>> Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 10:50 AM >>>> Subject: Re: From today's Tech Update >>>> >>>> >>>> I can think of one good reason to continue with >>> Windows or perhaps >>>> two even >>>> if everything else is equal. the first reason is a >>> matter of >>>> preference but >>>> many users may find it compelling. Consider speech. >>> As far as I >>>> know, >>>> Eloquence, Via Voice and Dectalk are not available for >>> Macs. I've >>>> heard the >>>> new synthesizer Mac has added and I am not impressed. >>> It has the same >>>> problems I've heard with all of the newer type of >>> synthesizers, >>>> incorrect >>>> inflections and more words pronounced oddly or slurred >>> than I find >>>> acceptable. According to the promotional material, >>> the synthesizer >>>> also >>>> simulates breathing before long passages. I don't >>> want a >>>> synthesizer to >>>> pretend to breathe. I want it to read during the time >>> it is >>>> designed to >>>> pretend to breathe and not waste my time. The new Mac >>> synthesizer >>>> may be as >>>> responsive as Apple claims, I have no way to know >>> since I heard a >>>> recording >>>> of it and didn't use it. However, many blind >>> people may very much >>>> want to >>>> continue to use the speech they currently use in >>> Windows or when >>>> upgrading >>>> to a g u i operating system from something else. What >>> about hardware >>>> synthesizers such as Double Talk or Tripple Talk that >>> blind people >>>> may want >>>> to use. Do they loose access to them if they use a >>> Mac? >>>> >>>> The second reason is one Mike mentioned. I am not >>> saying this is or >>>> is not >>>> the case. As with Mike, I pose the question but in a >>> different way. >>>> >>>> I currently use four screen-readers. I usually use >>> JAWS but I have a >>>> Window-eyes demo on my machine, NVDA, and I use System >>> Access to Go >>>> when it >>>> does something better than the other screen-readers. >>> Since I >>>> haven't used >>>> Macs, I can't evaluate this but the question >>> arises as to whether >>>> having >>>> access to so many options provides better access to >>> certain programs >>>> or to >>>> certain web sites. There are times when I get >>> markedly better >>>> access to a >>>> web site using something other than JAWS and times >>> when JAWS >>>> provides the >>>> best access. There are times when a feature in JAWS >>> gives me more >>>> convenient access to some aspect of a program. As >>> with Mike, I am >>>> skeptical >>>> that development of a screen-reader facing no >>> competition will equal >>>> development when there is meaningful competition. >>> Also, I question >>>> whether >>>> any single screen-reader can possibly deal as well >>> with a large >>>> number of >>>> programs as having different screen-readers with >>> different >>>> characteristics >>>> and variations of features. >>>> >>>> Isn't it interesting how many people complain >>> about Microsoft being a >>>> monopoly yet they are not the least bit bothered by >>> the fact that >>>> there is >>>> literally only one screen-reader for the Mac? This is >>> inconsistent. >>>> >>>> I'm not advocating that anyone use any particular >>> operating system. >>>> I have >>>> consistently said that people should use what meets >>> their needs and >>>> what >>>> they like. But I am not convinced that using Windows >>> doesn't have >>>> advantages. Using a Mac may have advantages but that >>> doesn't mean >>>> that >>>> Windows may not have advantages not found in the Mac. >>> It's >>>> unfortunate that >>>> so many Mac users discuss the Mac with missionary zeal >>> and religious >>>> fervor. >>>> It lowers their credibility. I don't see Windows >>> users doing the same >>>> thing. Whenever anyone is too fanatical about >>> anything, I become >>>> suspicious. >>>> >>>> Gene >>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>> From: "Jude DaShiell" >>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>> Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 9:23 AM >>>> Subject: Re: From today's Tech Update >>>> >>>> >>>>> Apple has lots of user's groups in existence >>> and not everybody who >>>>> uses >>>>> one of Apple's computers is connected with one >>> of those groups or >>>>> attends >>>>> meetings regularly to their cost. Also not every >>> Apple user knows >>>>> about >>>>> http://www.macupdate.com/ or >>> http://www.versiontracker.com/ >>>>> either. The >>>>> windows users could even come up with more >>> software too if they >>>>> camped out >>>>> on http://www.versiontracker.com/ too because that >>> site offers >>>>> software >>>>> links and information for both sets of operating >>> systems. By now >>>>> we all >>>>> of us know about the mac accessibility email lists >>> which is more >>>>> than many >>>>> sighted people know. Those same sighted people >>> who use mac's can >>>>> use the >>>>> same software those of us who use VoiceOver use >>> because VoiceOver >>>>> works >>>>> the way it does. So sighted users can use unison >>> as well as I can. >>>>> That's >>>>> an accessible newsgroup reader that works with >>> VoiceOver but not >>>>> all mac >>>>> software does yet. As to the complaint about >>> mac's and viruses, rest >>>>> assured Apple and those in the user's groups >>> keep current with actual >>>>> threats and all of them know it's only a >>> matter of time until those >>>>> threats become actual viruses. But here's >>> something to think about >>>>> for >>>>> now. One of the computer publications did a poll >>> of security >>>>> professionals and learned that when those security >>> professionals >>>>> have to >>>>> do their work given a choice of a windows machine >>> or a mac, the mac >>>>> would >>>>> be their machine of choice. One more thing to >>> keep in mind, Snow >>>>> Leopard >>>>> will fix the problems Apple found after Leopard >>> got released and >>>>> some of >>>>> those will be security optimizations. So Apple >>> isn't standing still >>>>> either. So long as Apple continues offering >>> better operating >>>>> systems than >>>>> Vista and I'm alive I see no reason to spend >>> money on windows. >>>> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >> > > > > >
