[DECtalk] decTalk on IOS with TestFlite beta app?
Don
Text_to_Speech at GMX.com
Wed Nov 16 01:41:47 EST 2022
On 11/15/2022 9:27 PM, Karen Lewellen wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> On Tue, 15 Nov 2022, jake mcmahanCharles Mcmahan wrote:
>
>> Normally I don't say much on these type things but I think this whole
>> thing is quite unnecessary. We all use products and technology in our own
>> way, think in our own way, that's what makes the world what it is. While I
>> personally use dectalk for some things, eloquence for others, I don't think
>> it's a bad idea for an old product to be invested in if proper permission is
>> given. Last I heard, Jake Gross did get the source from someone who actually
>> worked at the company, so really the legal thing is complicated and I
>> wouldn't do well exploring that one. Point is though, we're all people who
>> function in different ways and have our own ideas. Lots of this stuff is very
>> informative and it's interesting to see what others think but I don't think
>> it's necessary for anyone to be hostile or get worked up when there really is
>> no need for it.
>>
> Well said, which is why I spoke to the disrespectful comparison of how I
> *choose* to use equipment to an 8-track machine.
> What value is there in such a comment?
Value? It points out that the technology is OLD and no longer being
developed or supported, IN ANY WAY. Just like DECtalk is old and
unsupported. There are no active 8-track manufacturers. There is
no active DECtalk manufacturer.
As long as your 8 track (DECtalk) continues working AND you are
happy with its performance and not desirous of any features
available from newer technology, you can continue to use it.
Just like an 8 track user can continue to listen to his collection
of 8-track titles -- as long as they (and the player) continue
to work. But, if he wants 10 hours of music on a cartridge,
he's SoL -- ain't gonna happen with that technology. Or, if
he wants higher fidelity reproduction *or* error free copying.
And, there's no one he can talk to about getting those enhancements
made ... because there's no one asserting ownership of the product.
> Most of my remarks were not addressed to don specifically, but to the thread
> generally, which I freely owned up not reading.
> Why He chose to make it personal just because I did not write in context is
> entirely on him.
You chose to reply to *my* post -- not, for example, to josh's post in which
claims of "poor blind people on social security" was voiced. Along with the
passive-aggressive comments regarding my being "an authority on all aspects of
the human condition".
Or, am I mistaken? Was that intended as a COMPLIMENT??
> A shared label does not a shared experience make uniformly, that is part of
> what makes us human.
> Karen
> who is done commenting at all now.
More information about the Dectalk
mailing list