Re: another idea for speech

[jrebman@netcom.com (Jim Rebman)]

I will respond primarily to the comments made by Lar, but I will also 
answer a couple of others that have come up since his original post, and 
then, I hope this thread will end.

Lar writes:
> I can't agree with the idea that Synthavoice should be working on an
> NT screen reader.  IBM has already shown in OS/2 Warp 4 that it is
> quite feasible and apropos for voice support to be an OS-supplied 
> interface, and I'd rather see pressure for Microsoft to adopt IBM's 
> solution to have standard hooks.   

If, when you talk about an OS-resident voice capability, you are talking
about the voice I/O capabilities that are built into Merlin, then I have
to assume that you have never tried to use this kind of speech to
accomplish any kind of useful or productive work -- this kind of highly
inflected, natural-sounding speech is totally inappropriate for a blind
user.  Because of its highly-inflected nature it is nearly impossible to
understand at rates that are required for productive work; also, the
amount of listening fatigue that results from prolonged exposure to this
kind of speech would drive a normal person mad in short order.  Microsoft
and Sun, to name but two, are also developing these so-called speech APIs. 
Just fine for the bored executive who wants his e-mail read to him, or
for the computer hobbyist who likes "neat, cool, and shiny" things.  Of 
course, the kind of controls that one assumes to be in a normal screen 
reader are nowhere to be found in these speech APIs, either -- none but 
the simplest and most rudimentary.

If, on the other hand, you are referring to the kind of hooks that are
built into OS/2 that make it possible for Screen Reader/II to function,
then you have missed the obvious point that Screen Reader/II *IS* a
screen reader, and blind people who want to use computers need to use
screen reader software to realize the maximum flexibility, control, and
speed that it can offer over a simple, so-called "speech API".

Just for your information, Microsoft has developed a standard set of 
"hooks" (actually, it is a much more powerful accessibility API), 
unfortunately, it was not mature enough to include in NT 4.0, however, it 
will be in the next release.  You can check out the API for yourself, and 
even download the SDK -- go to www.microsoft.com/windows/enable/  There 
ye shall find what you seek.

The bottom line is that whatever platform you decide to use, wether it be 
OS/2, NT, or X386, the only effective way for a blind person to work with 
it will be through the use of a screen reader, at least at this point in 
time.

Then you continued:
> (Let Microsoft support X?  Why not?)

Sure!  Why not!  Why don't we just hand over Linux, VMS, OS/2, and all 
the screen reader and other accessibility aid developers to them as 
well...  You must be joking.  I really can't see giving Microsoft any 
more influence then they already have (which is too much to begin with).  
No, No, No, a thousand (and twenty-four) times NO!

Now, on to the other folks:

To Mike Malver: Emacspeak will do what you want -- it won't work very 
well with ELM as it is "right-out-of-the-box", but with some tweaking it 
should do just fine.  Switching between virtual terminals, each one 
running whichever shell you want, is a simple matter of hitting the 
alt-f1 through alt-f6 keys -- in the standard configuration of the 
version of linux that I am running, the default is for 6 virtual 
terminals f1 - f6.  You can change this up to 250+ virtual terminals if 
you wish, but changing from one to the other is very simple.

And finally to Kenneth...

*WE* know what we are talking about -- SynthaVoice makes screen reader 
software, as well as screen enlargement software.  They were the first 
company to develop a screen reader for Microsoft Windows (Slimware Window 
Bridge), and their current version is one of the finest, most stable, and 
powerful Windows/Windows '95 screen readers.  They do not make speech 
synthesizers, and yes, I do know the difference between a screen reader 
and a speech synthesizer -- I've been doing this for a while.

------

SynthaVoice *should* concentrate on an NT screen reader -- it is 
something that is desperately needed right now.  They don't need to spend 
any time, money, or effort  on a screen reader for X, and next time I 
talk to Laslowe, I'm fairly certain I can convince him of this.  Why 
should he make a huge investment in time and money, and compromise his 
already outstanding products, when the group I am affiliated with is 
going to deliver an X screen reader and give it away for free?  It is a 
business decision, and a reasonably easy one, at that.

-- JR