"Bleeding Edge" technology??
Is that the 'get-real' equivalent of "Leading Edge" technology?
Nice terminology.
JW
Kenneth Levites wrote:
>
> At 06:43 PM 7/26/96 -0700, you wrote:
> >
> >So far I have been using IBM's voicetype for windows 1.32 for all charting
> in the office. Recently IBM has come out with version 3.0 and since using it
> I think the time for using stenographers is coming to an end.
> >
> >1. Has anybody else had experience with speech recognition products?
> >2. Would like to exchange ideas about some specific macros we have set up
> with Voicetype?
> >3. Has anybody realized a financial saving whilst using these products.
> >
> >Sachit Shah
>
> I've used VoiceType since its original incarnation under OS/2 for my office
> notes. It has been buggy in my system and requires a great deal of
> tolerance. When working well, its great but it's so variable. I'm
> currently using v3.0--its vastly superior to install and will use any
> standard sound card which makes it nicer under win95.
>
> I've saved at least $5-7,000/year in transcription costs but it takes me
> longer to voice dictate than use the regular dictophone transcriber so much
> of it comes out of my hide.
>
> I'm not ready to recommend it to those who aren't tolerant of bleeding edge
> technology.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|