Comments

Grazie wrote on 6/9/2004, 1:35 AM
IBM - called . . er . . yup, got it! .. ViaVoice.

Got a few days to train it? Maybe the latest versions on XP work better .. but you are going to have too put some time to get it to understand your voice. But once trained it does work.

I had to do a lot .. and I mean a lot of handwritten "notes", transciption into WORD . . it did it and I got quite good at doing this .. It will be frustrsting at times .. .

Grazie
kameronj wrote on 6/9/2004, 4:55 AM
I dinked around with ViaVoice a few years ago. Pretty decent then. I"m sure the technology is even better today.

RafalK wrote on 6/9/2004, 5:35 AM
I had nothing but positive experience with Speking Dragon.
JJKizak wrote on 6/9/2004, 6:34 AM
For dictation its OK after you get used to it. For computer navigation
its a joke. The mouse is five times faster. If you can type over 60 words per minute I would not consider it. Just my opinion.

JJK
AlanC wrote on 6/9/2004, 7:11 AM
Grazie,

If you managed to get it to understand your London accent, it must be the 'bees knees'.

Watcha Mate!

Alan :~)
wcoxe1 wrote on 6/9/2004, 7:54 AM
It is all a matter of YOU. If you have the patience to train it, and if you have the patience to speak precicely, and if you have the patience to phrase your speech coherently, and if you have the patience to spell out words it can't decide between (two, too, to), and if you don't happen to have a cold, then you will like any of half a dozen speech to text products. If you have no patience, you will hate them.

By the way, they are only getting better, and some of them are getting fantastic now that computers are getting powerful enough to actually guess what you are about to say, rather than just listening to what you just said.
Orcatek wrote on 6/9/2004, 10:32 AM
I've used Dragon Naturally Speaking and the one that comes with windows XP. They the get better with time. You give them a basic training - then as you correct them they learn more and get better.

You really need to write alot to justify the use - as it will take time to get productive with it. The faster PC of today make it usable, but until it is well trained - you may well be able to type faster than it.



baysidebas wrote on 6/9/2004, 11:24 AM
I think you guys are speaking of SPEECH Recognition, not Voice Recognition. Voice recognition would be employed by an app to authenticate who you are by listening to your voice and comparing its characteristics to those on file. You know, sort of like Mission: Impossible stuff.
BrianStanding wrote on 6/9/2004, 11:35 AM
Wouldn't it be cool if you could do video transcriptions through some kind of speech-recognition software? It would make subtitles so much easier!

I'm guessing, though, that the "training" requirements would make these things pretty useless for anything where you have more than one person talking.

Anyone tried this?
Grazie wrote on 6/9/2004, 12:23 PM
I once did an experiment. I recorded my voice and on film . . I then used IBM ViaVoice to deliver the "words" to a text document .. it worked .. I was one stage away from doing the same as a type of voice to sub title option . . it COULD work and yes it would be very useful. Think of the impaired hearers and the like . . hmmm . .I see a Sponsorship Project for Sony Worldwide . . AHAH! . ..

Grazie
Solocinema wrote on 6/9/2004, 12:28 PM
The last few versions of MS Office include an adequate recognition app. I'm told that both IBM's product and Dragon's product are better, but I use the MS stuff because it's free.

bd
jcg wrote on 6/9/2004, 7:32 PM
Many thanks to all of you for your valuable input.

JCG