From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailout2-eri1.midsouth.rr.com ([24.165.200.7]) by speech.braille.uwo.ca with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 18Oput-0005uK-00 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 20:56:03 -0500 Received: from cpe-024-033-003-115.midsouth.rr.com (cpe-024-033-003-115.midsouth.rr.com [24.33.3.115]) by mailout2-eri1.midsouth.rr.com (8.11.4/8.11.4) with ESMTP id gBJ1txf25397 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 19:55:59 -0600 (CST) Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 19:55:53 -0600 (CST) From: Adam Myrow To: speakup@braille.uwo.ca Subject: a bit of trivia I found interesting Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: speakup-admin@braille.uwo.ca Errors-To: speakup-admin@braille.uwo.ca X-BeenThere: speakup@braille.uwo.ca X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.11 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: speakup@braille.uwo.ca List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Speakup is a screen review system for Linux. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: I was just looking through files on my computer and stumbled over a README file from an old shareware DOS screen reader called TinyTalk. The part that I found interesting is that it listed several synthesizers that existed around 1994 and what chipset they used. It mentioned that the Braille 'N Speak line as well as the Accent line both use a chip called the SSI263. I found this interesting because the Braille 'N Speak sounds like crap, has terrible pronunciation, and practically no inflection. The Accent still sounds very mechanical, but has a lot more inflection, and its pronunciation is 10 times better than the Braille 'N Speak line. Apparently, this chipset wasn't the only piece required to produce speech. So, anybody know what makes such a radical difference? I know this isn't directly Linux related, but I figured a lot of the list members have been using computers for a long time and might know what makes the difference or where I may find such information.