The text editing things are a huge drag with we that have gotten worse and they won't go away till we get direct edits.

I know osm corruption is alive and well in we 7 just this afternoon, I'd written a letter and then deleted a message.

Well, some lines from that message in eudora were still voicing as i went around to other apps, I was working with Aaron's hotspot scripts, and popping in and out of the we folder looking at the changes made, and now and again I'd hear the lines I'd deleted.

Flaky stuff like this happens in we7 and not in 6.1.

I remember we 5.5 being very stable to tell you the truth, I didn't see a lot of functionallity added to 6.1 over 5.5 atleast with the apps I use.

But I'm not on the beaten path with office apps, and excel and stuff, which i believe 6.1 was mostly about, I'm an audio guy and sonar and sound-forge and all the musical stuff is my bread and butter.

Most of those guys have moved to jaws-land, and I'm one of the few hold-outs, hoping for more out of we.

I seem to have no contemporaries, or colleagues trying to do what I'm doing with we, I really only know of one guy doing it seriously that I would consider at the level I'm at.

That is not to sound arrogant or condecending, but only that on lists like this I don't see much in the way of stuff dealing with advanced setfile writing, or how to get we to do really complex tasks.

I'm not a scriptor, so I'm kind of caught in the middle.

When gwmicro mostly deals with beginners needing to know things like how to load scripts, and browser issues and more generic stuff, nobody can ever duplicate what I see, but then nobody is running my stuff.

it's too easy just to say your machine is messed up, even though I can get the same kind of stuf with a clean machine.

There are fundamental diferences between the way video is implemented with jaws verses window-eyes.

I don't know all the technical details, but with jaws it is possible to do some basic tasks without the video intercept, much like you do with narrator.

On the other hand we is better at fielding display changes and not having to re-boot.

I still want to work with we in my aps, and after 7 versions of paying for the product, even though there are tools in jaws land that do what I need to do and do it well, I'm still hoping for a one screen-reader solution.

Despite all the hassles with we growing pains, there are things I love about we namely the non-copy protection aspects of it and the ease of putting it on any machine and the ease of doing a portable configuration.

And we is still good at finding things on the screen when jaws will show nothing, between the two screen-readers i think it's about as good as it gets

Atleast for us.

If one won't do it the other will.

But gwmicro really needs to be less insular in the core group, and watch what the other guys are doing, believe me, they are watching gwmicro, and feelling threatened enough to go to court over stupid stuf.

So it's really important when doing research and development to keep track of what the best is in the business and to either match it or do better at it.

Well, i think by version 8 or 9 we'll be able to really know for sure is window-eyes can really make the grade on these major productivity apps.

There's a lot of catching up to do, and not enough people to do it, but here's hoping for the best.



At 03:04 PM 9/26/2008, you wrote:
Hi Mike, for me 5.5 was the last good working version of we. 6.0 and 6.1 introduced many problems on the web, and many editing problems in all Microsoft products. I guess just not so very happy with we any more, with the 150 upgrade cost of 6.0/6.1 and the cost of this 1 for a product that just isn't very good and now not so stable anymore I can't justify it
Angelo
----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike Pietruk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Angelo Ercolamento" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Darren Harris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "'Terri Pannett'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "'GW Micro'" <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, September 26, 2008 3:21 PM
Subject: Re: I'm scared


Angelo

Well, I can understand the hessitancy with 7.0 given numerous comments,
but why go back to 5.5.
And, as for 7.0, it seems that clean installs and updated scripts have
reduced the number of problems reported.
7.0 will work fine for 99.999% of users in the near term.


My relationship with God begins with trust.
It also continues in trust.

Pastor Mark Cummmins, First Baptist church of Ocala, sermon, 09/14/08
http://wm.thegospel.com/ocala/080914_drcummins.wmv



__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 3474 (20080926) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com



__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 3474 (20080926) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com


If you reply to this message it will be delivered to the original
sender only.  If your reply would benefit others on the list and
your message is related to GW Micro, then please consider sending
your message to [email protected] so the entire list will receive it.

All GW-Info messages are archived at http://www.gwmicro.com/gwinfo, and can be searched through and sorted using the search
form at the bottom of the page.
If you wish to unsubscribe from this list, send a message to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and include leave gw-info in the body of the message.



For backing tracks, audio restoration, jingles and audio adds, low-priced tutoring and much more go to
www.affordablestudioservices.com

If you reply to this message it will be delivered to the original
sender only.  If your reply would benefit others on the list and
your message is related to GW Micro, then please consider sending
your message to [email protected] so the entire list will receive it.

All GW-Info messages are archived at http://www.gwmicro.com/gwinfo, and can be 
searched through and sorted using the search
form at the bottom of the page.
If you wish to unsubscribe from this list, send a message to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and include leave gw-info in the body of the message.

Reply via email to