| From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Mar 8 06:41 GMT 1995 | Date: Wed, 08 Mar 1995 06:15:46 GMT | From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Brian Gaff Sam Dept.) | Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | To: [email protected] | Subject: Re: Sound sampler... -Reply | X-Mailer: PCElm 1.10 | Lines: 25 | Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Precedence: bulk | Reply-To: [email protected] | Content-Type: text | Content-Length: 1189 | X-Lines: 25 | | In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Tim Wells writes: | > > > From what I remember from the press release, the Amstrad penpad thingy | > > > "learnt" over time what your handwriting was like. While it proabably has | > > > more memory than the SAM, and voice recogition requires more memory, | > > > something, even syllabalic commands would be feasible. Using this method. | > > > But then, I've only ever programmed in BASIC... | > > > | > > | > > Yeah but reconising characters on a bit of paper which you scan in, or draw | > > on your penpad (or whatever) is a damn sight easier. There's OCR (Optical | > > Character Recognition) s/w bundled with lots of Amiga/PC (etc) hand | > > scanners, and I think the Post Office have used it for years to | > > automatically read postcodes, though I'm not certain about that. | > | > OCR works fine on typed characters, but doesn't stand a chance with | > handwriting. That's why it has taken years for the PO to develop systems | > that can have a guess at handwriting. | | I could do with a gadjet like that. Why is it that folk with 486 | poser boxes resort to scribbling orders on tatty bits of paper? | Becasue we're not posers.
Honest. Will Easson
