- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: Scott Wright: "Call for Participation - Computers in Schools"
- Previous message: Judy Evans: "Re: New versions of Nat"
- In reply to: Ben.Pashley.APH@@mktmail.com: "Re[2]: NS 202 german Ed. problems"
- Next in thread: Mary Hopkins: "Re: Speech recognition on Linux [was: Re: OEM versions of Microsoft?]"
the current packaging of the products.
The identical products, with well-written documentation describing a process
of learning the product, customizing the product, and dealing with problems
would deserve a better rating. I observe that many people who buy the
product without having an external support mechanism such as this newsgroup,
some other user(s), or a good reseller; get the type of results which PC
Magazine reports.
IMHO, the price competition by Dragon and IBM has caused them to put
relatively poor microphones in the boxes which almost guarantee frustration.
I know that this was one way to reduce product cost; but it results in ratings
poorer than necessary.
SOME users have excellent out-of-box experiences -- I've seen this in my own
family, where my daughter got excellent accuracy much faster than I. Some of
my customers have done likewise; though typically after being advised on sound
card and system configuration purchase.
Of course, by this same standard, PC accounting programs score poorly -- I've
yet to see an accounting program that can handle a simple business such as
mine without causing me to spend hours and hours trying to figure out non-
intuitive features for things like partial refunds, rebates, etc.. So I go
back to a basic spreadsheet for my business accounting... just like many who
attempt speech recognition go back to typing/dictating/not writing.
Larry Allen
Softnet Systems, Inc.
Phoenix, AZ
> David Rollo wrote:
> >
> > Does anyone have comments on the fairly negative review of
> > NaturallySpeaking and ViaVoice in the March 10 issue of PC Magazine?
> >
> > PC Mag gave both NaturallySpeaking and ViaVoice a thumbs down as
> > currently-worthwhile tools for the average user. Five different
reviewers
> > tested the programs, and according to the report, all described lots of
> > frustration in use, and accuracy no better than 89% after training.
> >
> > The magazine declined to award an Editors' Choice, and suggested
> > "mainstream consumers" wait for further improvements before buying. The
> > magazine concluded that "some users could benefit .. if they're willing
to
> > invest the time...".
> >
> > These findings may not square with the experience of many established
> > users, but PC Magazine hardware / software reports have a reputation for
> > reliability, and usually carry a lot of weight in the marketplace.
> >
> > David Rollo
- Next message: Scott Wright: "Call for Participation - Computers in Schools"
- Previous message: Judy Evans: "Re: New versions of Nat"
- In reply to: Ben.Pashley.APH@@mktmail.com: "Re[2]: NS 202 german Ed. problems"
- Next in thread: Mary Hopkins: "Re: Speech recognition on Linux [was: Re: OEM versions of Microsoft?]"
 |  |