RE: Performance (was RE: TX chipset and voice applications)

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: Judy Evans: "RE: Performance (was RE: TX chipset and voice applications)"
• Previous message: Rose: "Re: Performance (was RE: TX chipset and voice applications)"
There may be other technical issues as well (sometimes it's not just
a matter of recompilation), but I suspect that it's also an issue of
providing quality assurance for the 32-bit product, and the associated
effort required with that.


I would be very surprised if Dragon ever releases a new version of
DragonDictate ... my impression is that they consider it to be a dead
product line, despite the fact that it's a terrific and very useful product.
This impression is based upon their turning over the product to IMSI
to resell as OEM, and also a conversation with a Dragon tech support
person when I requested that they make the necessary enhancements to
DragonDictate to make my "voiceController" application unnecessary.


http://www.out-loud.com/controller/


I think that we just have to hope that the macro and command/control
facilities of D/NS will improve in future releases.


Just my $0.02.


- Jonathan


>
> What I don't understand is why Dragon doesn't compile the whole of
> DragonDictate as 32 bit software. From what I can tell from using Norton
> Utilities, pieces of it are 32 bit, but the majority is sixteen bit. The
> macro facilities of NaturallySpeaking seem incomplete enough to hold off
> moving to that program until Dragon has done some more work on it. At least
> for my type of work, which tends to be short bits of text and programming.
>
> Chris


• Next message: Judy Evans: "RE: Performance (was RE: TX chipset and voice applications)"
• Previous message: Rose: "Re: Performance (was RE: TX chipset and voice applications)"