[Reader-users] Program Philosophy Changes Needed

[Gashel, James]

Hi Cory:

Most of the key people on both the development and marketing teams watch
the messages on this list very carefully.  I am probably the only one
among them who actually responds.  All of the other participants who are
comentators on this list are Reader users.  Obviously we value their
views and suggestions on the direction this product should take.  

Our philosophy is that we owe it to our customers to listen very
carefully to what they are saying to us.  Although the view is certainly
not unanimous, they seem to be telling us to concentrate our development
efforts on a product that is focused on being a reading machine.  That
we are doing, but we are not unaware of developments and possibilities
in regard to related technology.  If anything, it seems to me that the
views you have expressed fall pretty much in line with our somewhat
longer range philosophy about this product.  If the technology had
allowed it, I suspect that the first release version of this reader
would have been a single unit, rather than a unit which combines two
distinctive primary hardware components.  The choice we were facing in
the earlier stages of development, not that far back in time, was to
wait for PDAs and cameras to catch up to what we needed, or to jump out
there with a product as soon as we could find a camera and PDA that we
could combine and engineer to do the job.  We chose this latter course
so at least we could have a Reading machine.  This will not be the last
version of this device, and we are definitely listening to everyone to
help us plan the future direction.  Although you are not a current user
of the technology, your comments are valued as well.  Perhaps one day we
will be successful enough in your view that you will join us as a user.
I sure hope that won't be too far off.  

As for the uses of this device, I would say that it is far more than a
mail reader.  In my own experience, I have had access to scanning and
text-to-speech technology ever since I worked with Ray Kurzweil on the
first reading machine 32 years ago.  However, although I could have had
that kind of technology immediately at hand during all of that time, I
have rarely used it.  As for this device, I find that I need to use it
at least some of the time every day.  The reason I use it is to
accomplish productive work, not just to play with the technology.  This
device has been a life-changing experience for me.  It wouldn't have
been that way if all it would do is to read my mail.  

So, the bottom line is that I sure hope you don't actually leave the
list.  I realize that some of our reader users may not agree with the
advice you are giving us, but the perspective you are providing does
need to be considered.  This may mean that you decide not to post so
much, but I think you will find that continuing to know about the
development and direction of this product will be valuable to you in the
future.  Remember, this is only the beginning!
 

Thanks, J. G.

******************************************

James Gashel
Executive Director for Strategic Initiatives
NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND
1800 Johnson Street
Baltimore, Maryland  21230
Telephone:  (410) 659-9314, ext. 2227
Fax:  (410) 685-5653
Email:  jgashel at nfb.org



-----Original Message-----
From: reader-users-bounces at nfbnet.org
[mailto:reader-users-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Cory Martin
Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2006 11:13 PM
To: 'Kurzweil National Federation of the Blind Reader users list'
Subject: Re: [Reader-users] Program Philosophy Changes Needed

Damn Straight, that'd be one awesome microwave!  Know where I can buy
one of those ones?  Bet they're pretty expensive.
I'm going to stop posting on this list very likely because it seems that
new ideas aren't welcome and are only torn apart and it seems to be
everyone's personal mission to make fun of every idea put forth.  I put
forward my suggestions because I wanted to contribute in a positive way,
and don't really care one way or another if an idea is good or bad, it's
simply that; an idea, and whether it finds it's way in to a finished
product or not is for the most part irrelevant.  I also like to watch
user postings and the responses of the manufacturer to judge the level
of interest overall.  But as a friend of mine pointed out this product
is very expensive especially for the purpose of simply scanning one's
mail or some short documents on the fly, and although I'm not arguing
that the cost is likely justified, with that comes a measure of
responsibility to at least listen to people's ideas and put some
half-concious effort in to making them reality.  Which ones come first
or second, third or forth or not at all really doesn't matter.  I don't
even own one of these devices, but I can honestly say that if the whole
point of it is to scan some business cards or short documents, then I'll
pass, especially if there will never be any plans to provide it as a
stand-alone application.  The Quicklink-Pen Elite can provide similar
functionality although in a much more limited way at a fraction of the
cost.
Please understand I'm not trying to compare two products or say that one
is better than the other, if anything the Reader if compared to the
Quicklink-Pen for example, would probably win hands down, but that's not
the point.  What the Reader can do today is impressive and I'm not
disputing that, but our world is progress just like the microwave with
the one-function knob to the one that can sense the temperature of
what's being cooked and adjust accordingly.  That is the happy and sad
reality of society and technology today.  There are different people as
well, those who just want it to work and those who wanna push the
limits.  I tend to be one of those to push the limits.  Many products
produced for the visually impaired are designed to be "blind friendly",
and although that's great in many ways, it's limiting in others.  We
have enough limits on ourselves already, we don't need to add more on
our own heads.
	So fine, I suggested that the system be made more open so it
could be installed and used with other software/hardware to make an
all-in-one device.  I have heard nothing but opposition to it so
therefore I'm done.
Afterall it was only a suggestion.  It's not like those who liked to use
it as a reader and nothing else still couldn't just because I had mine
playing MP3's in the background while reading just because I know how to
use the Pocket Media Player.  As to the statement about supporting
non-Reader issues in Tech support I can tell you that I work in support
for an internet service provider, and I get more calls than I can stand
from people who are absolutely clueless about computers and in my
opinion have no business owning one, wanting me to help them with their
Web Cam or printer, or if their computer won't start or if they're
absolutely dense and can't read type or spell, or can't use a mouse (and
I have to talk in terms as though I were speaking to a child), and the
solution of "refer to original equipment manufacturer" applies every
time.  Just out of curiosity, if a user of the Reader calls up tech
support saying that their unit won't power on ETC and if it is shipped
back to the company for repair, is the repair done in house? Or is it
passed on to Dell or whoever actually makes the PDA being adapted?  It's
not like the Reader is it's own product in the first place, it's a
mainstream PDA modified with a special case and software package which
keeps the user from getting to the actual Pocket Windows interface
itself.
So maybe before one tries to cut down other's ideas or suggestions maybe
try to think about the vision they actually have and decide if it's such
a terrible one or not.  Keep in mind there are PDA's out there with
camera's built in, and even though the quality of such devices isn't the
best at the moment and thus would not be practical for a pocket reader,
in the future when 8MP cameras are integrated in a device the need for
an external camera would no longer be there, and obviously this reality
will happen, time is only the undetermined factor, and I doubt it'll
take all that long.  So for those of you opposed to new ideas about
technology try to hold back on being so critical because even a concept
as a pocket reader would have been laughed at as impossible five years
ago, and here it is today.
Cory



-----Original Message-----
From: reader-users-bounces at nfbnet.org
[mailto:reader-users-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of MARK FELIZ
Sent: November 29, 2006 8:24 PM
To: reader-users at nfbnet.org
Subject: Re: [Reader-users] Program Philosophy Changes Needed

Hello Nick:

Now, Now, remember, we live in a I want society. We not only expect our
microwave to cook our meal in ten seconds or less but we expect the
microwave to get the food out of the freezer, unwrap, defrost, cook,
keep it

warm till we are good and ready to eat, remind us our meal is waiting,
serve

the meal in proportions to our body mass, and ...

What do you think?

Mark Feliz




>From: "W. Nick Dotson" <nickdotson at bellsouth.net>
>Reply-To: Kurzweil National Federation of the Blind Reader users 
>list<reader-users at nfbnet.org>
>To: "Kurzweil National Federation of the Blind Reader users 
>list"<reader-users at nfbnet.org>
>Subject: Re: [Reader-users] Program Philosophy Changes Needed
>Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2006 12:28:17 -0600
>
>There are "General Purpose" and "Special Purpose" systems.  Your 
>desktop or

>notebook PC is General Purpose in nature and intent.  The PDA in the 
>KNFBR is being used specifically to provide a hardware platform on 
>which images captured by the camera are to be recognized, and the 
>recognized text read aloud.  What don't you understand about the nature

>of this "Limited Purpose" system, as exemplified in the name for it, 
>the Kurzweol National Federation of the Blind Reader"?
>
>Nick
>
>On Wed, 29 Nov 2006 10:23:50 -0700, Cory Martin wrote:
>
>  	Hi,
>  	As for CPU processing power, when it comes to this software like
any
>  software should there not be a min system requirements list?  Like 
>say, you
>  can't run it on a PDA that isn't at least 500 or 600 MHZ with 200 
>Megs of
>  on-board memory and some form of storage media?  Ovbiously if I had a

>4-year
>  old PDA and wanted to run the reader on that I might be asking for a 
>lot,

>I
>  just feel that a device is wasted if all it can do is run one program

>like
>  the reader.  There should at least be a means to exit the application

>so the
>  PDA can be used normally, such as with MSP installed to provide 
>speech to
>  other areas.
>  	As for batch scanning, I believe it deserves a place on a new
>  features request list if maybe a lower place then say, being able to
>  recognize black on white text which is, a more important and much 
>more
>  fundamental requirement.
>  	My only suggestion was that the scanning software not dominate
the
>  PDA so that it can be used for other things.  That way those who want

>to use
>  it strictly for reading can do that and those who want to integrate 
>it with
>  other add-ons or software have that option.
>  	Cory
>
>
>  -----Original Message-----
>  From: reader-users-bounces at nfbnet.org  
> [mailto:reader-users-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Mike Freeman
>  Sent: November 29, 2006 8:45 AM
>  To: Kurzweil National Federation of the Blind Reader users list
>  Subject: Re: [Reader-users] Program Philosophy Changes Needed
>
>  Corey:
>
>  The problem is procesor power. It takes a helluva lot of power to 
> analyze  images. So a run-of-the-mil PDA won't cut it.
>
>  As far as batch processing goes, there's an inherent inconsistency 
>or,
>  rather, assumption in the thinking of many: that is that one will 
>always get
>
>  the orientation right as one scans pages. To a certain extent, this 
>is a
>  matter of practice. But there's always the odd page that doesn't scan

>well.
>  And one won't know until long afterward. And, given the limitations 
>of the
>  PDA and the constraints upon the complexity of the Reader software, 
>it's not
>
>  feasible at present to go back and edit pages on the PDA. Moreover, 
>it's
>  like the old saw of not getting a job without experience while 
>needing a job
>
>  to get that experience. One needs to analyze the image to know if one

> got

>a
>  good scan and this is the antithesis of batch processing.
>
>  Finally, NFB does not have unlimited time, manpower or resources; we 
> must  put these to work in areas where other devices are not 
> available. While  reading books with the Reader would be nice, there 
> are other systems that

>do
>
>  this more efficiently. In my view, Reader development should 
>concentrate on
>  making the Reader do what other devices -- yes, even money 
>identifiers --
>  don't do. And the more one complicates a device, the more avenues one
>  introduces for errors. This is great for tech support people but not 
>so
>  great for the rest of us!
>
>  That's my take, anyway.
>
>  Mike
>
>  ----- Original Message -----
>  From: "Cory Martin" <cory_martin at shaw.ca>
>  To: "'Kurzweil National Federation of the Blind Reader users list'"
>  <reader-users at nfbnet.org>
>  Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2006 9:29 PM
>  Subject: [Reader-users] Program Philosophy Changes Needed
>
>
>  Hello List,
>  First off before I get started I would like to point out that I do
>  not have one of these devices so thus cannot comment on the overall
>  functionality of the device itself.  From what I understand of it the

>Reader
>  sounds like a very exciting advancement in the way the Visually 
>Impaired can
>  access information.  Keep in mind that the Visually Impaired are not 
>really
>  capable of reading or writing technically anyway and without 
>technology such
>  as this that problem becomes almost unsolvable.  We finally have a 
>device
>  that is hand held no longer tying one to a desk and flatbed scanner.
>  When it comes to features why would a batch option be anything but a
>  bad idea?  In all reality it's not likely one would take the time to 
>scan

>a
>  book with the reader unless they could have a way of orienting the 
>camera
>  correctly to the page with each page, but just because it might not 
>work
>  doesn't mean it shouldn't be there to use if needed.
>  My last and final comment is directed more at the developers of the
>  Reader itself.  It's not really anything more than a suggestion but, 
>for
>  those of us who do not need a device that is simplified down to one
>  interface, why not design the reader in such a way so that it can be 
>an
>  add-on application to the rest of an already existing PDA?  I have a 
>PDA and
>  it works fine but I know I wouldn't want to carry a PDA strictly for
>  scanning documents, one specifically for GPS and one for general 
>media and
>  note taking functions.  Can you imagine trying to remember to charge 
>all the
>  batteries?  I believe that there should be a version of the KNFB 
>reader made
>  available for one who wishes to add it to a standard PDA based on a
>  licensing system, and then one can provide their own input device, 
>such as a
>  recommended camera perhaps sold with the software optionally.  Just a
>  thought...A PDA should be universal.
>  Cory
>
>
>  -----Original Message-----
>  From: reader-users-bounces at nfbnet.org  
> [mailto:reader-users-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Rob Monitor
>  Sent: November 28, 2006 10:14 PM
>  To: Kurzweil National Federation of the Blind Reader users list
>  Subject: Re: [Reader-users] Joined today
>
>  Hi, I was wondering how the optacon worked I seen one back in the 
>early 80's
>
>  but did not have the chants to really look at it...Some one  was 
>using it
>  in a ofice and when I asked about it  they said they just got it and 
>did not
>
>  know that much about it...
>      thanks rob
>  ----- Original Message -----
>  From: "Evelyn Weckerly" <weckerly at i2k.com>
>  To: "Kurzweil National Federation of the Blind Reader users list"
>  <reader-users at nfbnet.org>
>  Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2006 9:54 PM
>  Subject: Re: [Reader-users] Joined today
>
>
>  > Hi,
>  >
>  > I had an Optacon thanks to the Mott Foundation. I had it from 1980
>  > until I got version 2 of what is now k1000. I finally sold it to
>  > someone who desperately wanted a spare because his job depended on
>  > that technology.
>  >
>  > Evelyn
>  >
>  > At 07:55 PM 11/28/2006, you wrote:
>  >>Hi users of the new Kurzweil NFB reader, Ken Lawrence Central
Chapter.
>  >>Just
>  >>joined the list today looking forward to the dialog and the  latest

>news
>  >>concerning the reader.  I'm a bit of an old timer so I go back  to
>  >>the Optacon's
>  >>glory days.  just wondering how many users of the new  reader used 
>to use
>  >>the
>  >>Optacon?  if you did, hope you saw the item in the  October monitor

>about
>  >>the
>  >>Optacon survey.  they're looking for users, and  people who don't 
>use
>  >>there
>  >>Optacon any more.  they are thinking of putting  nonuse Optacons 
>back in
>  >>to
>  >>circulation.  if they get enough response to it,  they may relaunch
>  >>the Optacon
>  >>with updated circuitry to make it possible for it  to read modern
>  >>print formats
>  >>and font sizes used today.  forget the email  address off hand, but
>  >>does anyone
>  >>on list remember what happened to the voice  output that was 
>developed at
>  >>around the same time as the First Kurzweil readers  that was mente 
>for the
>  >>Optacon?  also on a related question, oops, 2  questions, will
>  >>future portable
>  >>readers have a Braille display incorporated in  to it?  and also if

>a Car
>  >>is
>  >>developed for the blind, it seems a form of  the Kurzweil reader 
>could be
>  >>incorporated in to it so that a Street sign could  be read or even
>  >>the menu at a drive
>  >>through.  Yeah, it's a great time to be  blind Huh?  Ken.
>  >>
>  >>I pledge to  participate actively in the efforts of the national
>  >>federation
>  >>of the blind to  achieve equality, opportunity, and security for 
>the
>  >>blind; to
>  >>support the  policies and programs of the federation; and abide by 
>it's
>  >>constitution.
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>_______________________________________________
>  >>Reader-users mailing list
>  >>Reader-users at nfbnet.org
>  >>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/reader-users
>  >
>
>
>  
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------
>----
-
>  ----
>
>
>  > _______________________________________________
>  > Reader-users mailing list
>  > Reader-users at nfbnet.org
>  > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/reader-users
>  >
>
>  _______________________________________________
>  Reader-users mailing list
>  Reader-users at nfbnet.org
>  http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/reader-users
>
>  _______________________________________________
>  Reader-users mailing list
>  Reader-users at nfbnet.org
>  http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/reader-users
>
>
>  _______________________________________________
>  Reader-users mailing list
>  Reader-users at nfbnet.org
>  http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/reader-users
>
>  _______________________________________________
>  Reader-users mailing list
>  Reader-users at nfbnet.org
>  http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/reader-users
>
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Reader-users mailing list
>Reader-users at nfbnet.org
>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/reader-users


_______________________________________________
Reader-users mailing list
Reader-users at nfbnet.org
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/reader-users

_______________________________________________
Reader-users mailing list
Reader-users at nfbnet.org
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/reader-users