Why does Mark Conrad keep putting his foot in his mouth?

Discussion in 'Windows Vista General Discussion' started by andy t, Feb 3, 2010.

  1. andy t

    andy t Guest

    changing.






    Good for you! It gives you something to do in your twilight years and keeps
    you occupied I suppose.





    Now I see we are changing the goalposts once again. A familiar trait you
    carry proving conclusively that you make up your own rules to suit your own
    ends.

    Let's have a little recap shall we ;-). People can easily refer back and
    see exactly what you wrote in your previous posts.
    You implied I could not train any word and in particular a medical word such
    as annulopapillary. There it is again using WSR coming out first time,
    which conclusively proves you wrong.

    NOW you are saying in your very own words above that it can be done albeit
    by your interpretation of an unwieldy hack. I wish you would make up your
    mind as to what rules you are using.


    And anyway, I did not need an unwieldy hack to do it. If you read my posts
    properly, the technique is all in the way you pronounce it when recording a
    pronunciation of it in the speech dictionary.


    I spoke the actual word but just broke it down in gentle pauses as in
    'annul-o-papillary' annulopapillary. There it is again, works without fail
    for me. There is nothing unwieldy about that. I cannot help it if it works
    every time for me using that technique.
    You do come out with some poppycock ;-). I bet its great fun playing
    Monopoly with you. I bet by the end the game, you'd have invented a new
    one! What with all your rule changing and bull shit :).




    Ah! So there's a proviso now? So now you are admitting it can be done.

    That's a little bit different from the original question and test you put to
    me. Changing the rules once again Tsk! tsk! Just the same with your words
    per minute scenario that you backtracked on several times.




    Works for me, no burden at all ;-). In fact by doing it in 20 seconds, this
    sort of blows your theory out of the water! Your tests are easy peasy, even
    with that medical word annulopapillary when spoken as recorded and
    concisely. There it is again above. No unwieldy hack needed. You do seem
    to get yourself into a pickle, don't you :).




    Read the above. Been there, done that, got the T-shirt.





    I know what the word means but I've been telling you virtually in every post
    that it WORKS for me. Therefore, 'bug' or 'error' does not apply, does not
    conform, and is irrelevant.

    Irrelevant (adjective) not applicable :).



    I didn't. Read the above. Been there, done that, got the T-shirt :).



    Who cares what you think!!! That is irrelevant.

    Irrelevant (adjective) not applicable :).





    Not at all. None of the speech apps is perfect actually.




    LOL! I can see it is getting to you by your above remark. I do not have to
    apologise for anything seeing as I have polished off all of your little
    pointless tests in a matter of seconds and again as I say, proving you wrong
    so easily and I love it :)).
    Don't take it to heart Mark; you'll give yourself a heart attack at your age
    ;-).

    I told you in the last post. If it is so crappy, stop using it you moron.
    Spend more time with your imaginary friend if it's too difficult for your
    ailing brain.





    Who cares what you want. That is irrelevant.

    Irrelevant (adjective) not applicable :).
    I succeeded ;-).




    In which case, that means nothing. Your opinion is irrelevant ;-).
    Irrelevant (adjective) not applicable :).




    Then stop using it etc etc.

    Your judgement means nothing, as you are no expert. So, it is irrelevant
    ;-).

    Irrelevant (adjective) not applicable :).





    Bullshit! A likely excuse.

    Doctors are not poor, only your excuses are.



    < SNIP >


    Who cares what you recommend. Your opinion is irrelevant.

    Irrelevant (adjective) not applicable :).





    Poppycock! On the contrary. I have been using Dragon Professional since
    November last year and found it relatively easy to use. I am already making
    macros in the Command Browser with no problem at all except for a little
    advice from the experts now and again.
    It took me a little time to get used to and memorise the slightly different
    commands and quirks that WSR has but that's all. Now I interact between the
    two (read my previous post on how easy it is done) and I have memorised
    virtually all the different sets of commands between BOTH apps. I have the
    best of both worlds between two excellent apps at my disposal. Believe me;
    myself being a quadriplegic they have to be good otherwise, I would not use
    them!




    Temper! temper! Proving you wrong gives me great satisfaction. That
    proves YOU are the dumb one by setting your pathetic tests that I have
    passed with flying colours with WSR every time ;-).




    Why? Does she want the cyborg to be unintelligent and have dementia?


    I am guessing she must be your imaginary friend ;-).





    If only that were possible.

    Let's hope they make a better job of it than the first time :).

    andy t
     
    andy t, Feb 3, 2010
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. andy t

    andy t Guest

    "Mark Conrad" has lost it!





    LOL! I have noticed your posts are getting longer and longer just to try
    and get your futile points across with palpable failure each time. Most of
    the points we have already covered; I have answered AND proved you wrong.
    So there is no use going over old ground just because you have a sad case of
    dementia and a failing memory. It is obvious for everyone to see you have
    no family life. Either that or you have forgotten you have one.


    So are we ready?

    Questions already been answered can be checked by looking through previous
    posts. So I do not waste any more of my valuable time, I will scornfully
    remind you of these, as it is self evident you are incapable of remembering
    for yourself ;-).




    1. WSR is integrated within the operating system and takes up little
    resource.
    2. Although Dragon is well known for being a resource hog, they recommend
    the requirements of your PC be a minimum of 2 GB. Since most PCs these days
    now are made with at least that requirement, the problem should not arise.
    My old PC was 2 GB and I had WSR and Dragon running side-by-side (as I
    explained in one of my previous posts) working with no problem at all.

    I have 4 GB on my new machine with a very fast processor and sometimes I
    have had 12 different applications running at the same time and all being
    interacted by using commands from either WSR or Dragon that are ALWAYS OPEN.
    I have no trouble at all ;-).



    If they can afford an app costing $5000 then they sure as hell can afford
    any computer capable of running it. Keep it real! We are talking about
    domestic and business users where the size of the hard drive on a computer
    is concerned.

    As I've been saying all along, the right tools for the right job and I
    firmly believe, especially in the medical profession, they would not skimp
    on a tool just because it was cheaper.

    Having said that, I don't see your point here. What has a $5000 app got to
    do with WSR or Dragon?
    One minute you're saying doctors are so poor they would prefer to use an app
    that is not designed for their ultimate requirements. Next, you are off the
    scale talking of a $5000 app they use. Medical radiologists, doctors. All
    still work within the medical profession. Therefore, I would imagine they
    could not afford to skimp. (As I have been saying all along).




    Then stop using it! Repeated it hundreds of times to you before. (Read my
    previous posts to suggest what to do with your time instead) ;-).





    Wrong! I use the KnowBrainer forums for advice on Dragon, not WSR. Seeing
    as this is a predominantly Dragon advisory website, this makes sense do you
    not think?




    Well they would, wouldn't they seeing as though they are trying to sell the
    Dragon and KnowBrainer software to you. Along with all the microphones on
    the same website. Nothing unusual about that. That is just good business
    sense just as any good salesman would advise you to buy his wares. After
    all, they are trying to make a living ;-).




    Plus a lot more? You have mentioned one thing above. Hardly a lot more is
    it.


    Seeing as I only use my PC at home. I have no need for such an item. To be
    honest, I do not know if WSR can be used with a digital recorder or not. My
    guess is that it can but you are better off consulting Marty on that one.
    Nevertheless, that will not lose me any sleep and clutching at straws by
    trying to impress me with one supposedly item, shows how desperate you are.

    So now these poor doctors as you call them not only have to buy a cheap
    speech app, they have to invest further with more equipment really classed
    as luxury extras. If they don't want to buy an expensive speech app (the
    right one to suit their needs,) they are hardly likely to consider anything
    else, are they.




    I'm sorry it does not rock my boat and is surplus to my requirements anyway.
    Besides, I'm sure this can be done with WSR anyway; otherwise, Marty would
    not sell digital recorders.



    My god! I expected you to list out all the many extras you boasted about
    above, that Dragon has over WSR. You have listed one!

    Instead, I looked below and all I saw was a brief insight into your
    autobiography about when you went jogging and was totally irrelevant!

    Irrelevant: (Adjective). Not applicable.

    Nice try though ;-)


    The first and most obvious advantage WSR has over Dragon is cost and the
    second most obvious advantage is it comes integrated within a complete
    operating system. (That's two straight away)


    Within the programmes themselves, there are quite a few little advantages
    and timesavers that WSR possesses which Dragon does not which I have
    mentioned in previous posts. Mainly on the command side. When using
    dictation, the commands needed to move the cursor, correct, delete or change
    something etc. They can both handle this no problem and there is virtually
    no difference between them except you might have to say a different command
    within each app to achieve the same result.


    For example to insert the cursor before or after a word in Dragon you would
    say "insert before" or "insert after" the word. In WSR, you would say, "go
    after" or "go before" the word.


    Yet even here, WSR has a slight advantage over Dragon. I will explain.


    If you use the command above, for example. You say go or insert after or
    before a word, if the same word is duplicated on the screen either once or
    multiple times, Dragon will only go to the nearest version of that word with
    the cursor whereas using WSR the numbers will come up on each duplicate of
    the word and you can choose which one you want to interact with. By the way,
    the new show numbers software that can be used with Dragon cannot do this as
    far as I'm aware.


    This is not so bad in Dragon because you can choose a word quite near to the
    one you want to interact with and then use the command. Nevertheless, it is
    still an unwanted extra command and a pain in the ass and especially so if
    the command is "delete so and so" and Dragon deletes the wrong duplicated
    word, you want instead of giving you a choice by WSR with the numbers. This
    then being a failsafe methods of never getting the wrong duplicated word you
    want no matter how many times the word is duplicated.


    Then there is the show numbers command itself that we all know now Dragon
    has copied because it is a faster way to get around the computer. (Just As
    Well, Microsoft or the computer guru who invented the show numbers within
    WSR did not patent it. Otherwise, Nuance would still be in the slow lane on
    the command side).


    I am actually quite pleased that this software is now available to Dragon
    because it simplifies everything. Having said that, over the next months it
    is bound to need more tweaks to get anywhere near the WSR version that is
    far superior at the moment.


    For example, (and you can correct me if I am wrong because I haven't tried
    it fully myself yet) I have four mail accounts each with its own inbox, sent
    items etc. In WSR, if I simply say "inbox," then only four number pulses
    will come up labelled 1-4 on each inbox and I just choose the one I want.
    This is as opposed to simply saying "show numbers" which will effectively
    highlight everything. I do not believe it works like this in Dragon and is
    not selective like WSR is.


    Then there is your clutching at straws argument that the new show numbers
    software can be faded so you can see the menus below. Seeing as the show
    number pulses flash on and off in WSR, there is no need for this.


    Another command I have found works better in WSR than Dragon is if you want
    to switch from one program application to the next. I know you can say
    switch to blah blah blah in Dragon but if you cannot remember the program
    you want or it has a long or unusual name, you may as well give up!


    This invariably happens in Dragon so the next step is to say "switch to
    window 1" or "switch to window 2" but then you have to remember which window
    is what number and sometimes I have 12 applications up on screen at any one
    time. Geeze! What a commotion and BIG DISADVANTAGE.


    I know you got the show numbers program now to deal with this problem (which
    you eventually will have to buy) but I didn't even need the show numbers in
    WSR to sort this out. All you say is "switch application" then a window will
    pop up on screen naming all the exact names of the applications you have
    open at the time and each one numbered. You simply choose the number of the
    application you want and it comes up on screen straight away. This
    eliminates having to memorise which program in which in Dragon and better
    than that, you do not need to try and get your tongue around long-standing
    application names. This is even quicker than using the show numbers
    alternative in Dragon.


    Those are just a few, I could give you more but I think you get the gist
    now.


    To be balanced, there are also some commands in Dragon that I find easier
    than using in WSR but not as many.


    THAT, is why I use both. Dragon mainly for dictation especially on long
    essays or writings interacting with WSR in an instant to use the much
    quicker command side in certain aspects as I have explained. And WSR for
    commands and dictation for smaller shorter documents such as e-mail etc and
    definitely for getting around the computer faster if I want to surf etc.


    Dragon has a bit more catching up to do to beat WSR on the command side but
    the show numbers software is heading it a bit closer and that is if you
    include the KnowBrainer software running alongside it as well. Without that,
    forget it! That is another disadvantage in Dragon because you need to pay
    for this additional software to get the maximum out of it and you have to
    have Dragon in the first place for the KnowBrainer software to work.


    As I say, the show numbers software should improve it just as in every newer
    version of WSR, the dictation is becoming more accurate. This is evolution
    at work my friend ;-)





    THANK CHRIST! There is a God after all ;-).



    And very wise of them to do so indeed.




    I am not interested in how it is pronounced. All I am interested in is
    proving your point wrong and that it will come out on screen every time I
    pronounce it. I may be pronouncing it improperly but the principle remains
    the same. As long as it is in the speech dictionary and you pronounce it the
    way you recorded it, then it will work. (Didn't I say this before?) Blimey,
    I'm beginning to become as screwy as you are and that word déjà vu comes to
    mind once again.


    Work: (noun) the function of completing a process or carrying out a task
    Work: (intransitive verb) be successful. To be effective or achieve a
    desired result.


    No problem at all?


    No! Comprehend?



    Comprehend: Understand. (Transitive and intransitive verb) to grasp the
    meaning or nature of something.



    I meant to write syllables. Sorry about that.


    For a start, if you say three words as in 'separate' three words then you
    will get three words come out on screen dickhead.


    I thought I explained this properly somewhere before. Let me explain a
    little better this time for the last time.


    Annul-o-papillary. Not three words but three syllables with a tiny (and I
    mean tiny) pause in between each so in effect it is just one word and by
    that pronunciation and speaking it this way the recording picked it up. And,
    as I have said so many times before I have lost count, as long as you
    pronounce it the same as you recorded it, it will come out on screen like
    magic.


    I am in WSR now and let's try again. We are talking about the word
    annulopapillary again. There you go. Of course, I will also concede that if
    you miss pronounce the word from that of your recording by only a little,
    then there is the chance it will come out wrong. I just assume this is the
    same for all speech apps. I will try it in Dragon Professional when I get
    time.




    I have been. That is one of the reasons I am getting 98-99% accuracy with
    WSR and can get around the computer faster than you can ;-).



    Okay. I can live with that because what you believe, to me is irrelevant.


    Irrelevant: (adjective) not applicable.



    No. I'll leave that to you because that is your imaginary world along with
    the tall, fairytale stories you tell.




    Um, not true. I have never said this. There you go mauling my words again.
    The statement above is inaccurate. You can check this quite easily by
    looking back on my earlier posts.


    What I have actually said is; both speech apps have their advantages and
    disadvantages over each other, some of which I have explained above. I will
    and always have admitted in previous posts that Dragon is more accurate than
    WSR with dictation. WSR I find easier and quicker on the command side of
    things. All of which I have spoken of several times. So they both have their
    good points and bad points and that is why I use both. (To get the best out
    of each of them)


    So you see your statement above, accusing me of saying 'WSR is almost as
    good as Dragon' is a total fabrication made up by you. It is not a case of
    it being black or white as that. I have never said one app is better than
    the other one. They both have their uses and both are excellent in different
    ways. That is a totally different statement to, your made up one.




    What I have said can be looked up in any of my other posts quite easily. I
    did say I would not repeat stuff I had mentioned in previous posts but I
    wanted to set this point out to you for the last time.



    Not at all and I have answered this in previous posts. Change the record.


    We shall never know ;-). I use Dragon Professional because I can make my
    own macros with this version and so much more than the 'Preferred' version
    ;-).



    If you are talking about 'Dragon's Accuracy Center' Yes, I know. So does
    the toolkit.


    < SNIP >


    Been through all that. Change the record.


    Been there, done that, got the T-shirt. Read my previous posts. You don't
    need the toolkit for that, you don't need to make a macro for that. READ MY
    PREVIOUS POSTS!




    No, it is not.



    What do you mean if? I already have ;-). If you are referring to your
    full-blown test with the medical jargon in it, I have explained in previous
    posts why I do not have to do it. Read my previous posts.


    Succeeded for me :).

    And anyway, that is only your silly little opinion and your opinion is
    irrelevant ;-).


    Irrelevant: (adjective) Not applicable.

    andy t
     
    andy t, Feb 4, 2010
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. andy t

    andy t Guest

    "Mark Conrad" is confused and does not know the difference between the WSR
    toolkit and the document scanning feature he keeps going on about!






    Okay, I did a bit of research because I did not know what the **** you were
    on about by keeping on saying "document scanning feature." I believe I know
    what you are on about now.


    I believe what you are referring to is the feature in 'Speech Properties'
    within the 'Advanced speech options' section of 'Speech Recognition' in the
    control panel. If this is what you mean, then why did you not word it as I
    have above instead of keep calling it a 'document scanning feature?'

    It's no wonder I could not understand what the **** you were on about!

    First things first, if this is what you mean then let me know in your next
    post.

    Let me educate and correct you once again if this is the case.

    That feature was found useless from the time of Vista Beta 1. (From way back
    when it was in its trial period). Don't ask me why they kept it in because
    I don't know! It was designed to scan every single document on your hard
    drive and to not only help speech recognition but handwriting recognition as
    well. This is what Marty has been trying to tell you.


    THIS IS NOT THE WSR TOOLKIT YOU MORON BECAUSE THE WSR TOOLKIT WORKS!!

    IT IS NOT THE SAME AS THE FEATURE YOU ARE ON ABOUT AND IS VERY SEPARATE!


    Separate: (adjective) 'different' 'unrelated': distinct from or unrelated to
    something else: not shared with somebody or something else.


    Comprehend?


    Comprehend: Understand. (Transitive and intransitive verb) to grasp the
    meaning or nature of something.


    This is what I have been telling you in all my previous posts over and over
    again and asking you if you have actually got the WSR toolkit which I'm sure
    you have not now because that works!

    Just because you cannot explain yourself properly, keep calling something a
    'document scanning feature' like a stuttering broken record and not being
    more specific which I asked you to be umpteen times, it is no wonder nobody
    understands your posts at times!

    It is not a substitute for adding specific documents or training the
    acoustic model that the WSRToolkit does very well. It does it well if you
    are talking about standard language usage.



    These are just 3 of the items within the toolkit I have mentioned in several
    of my last posts and what they do. (There are 7 altogether).


    'Add to dictionary' feature. (This is the article within the toolkit
    describing what it does)

    The purpose of "Add to Dictionary" is to help the speech recognition engine
    with difficult to understand words and phrases.

    If you find certain words or phrases consistently being misunderstood, you
    can add these to your personal speech dictionary, as well as record a
    pronunciation. This will increase the chances of accurate recognition for
    these particular words and phrases.

    Copy and paste words and/or phrases in the text box area to the left. Each
    word or phrase should be on a separate line, for instance:

    alpha
    beta
    zebras at the zoo etcetera and so forth

    When you are ready to begin adding words to your personal dictionary, click
    (or say) 'Add Words' and you will be guided through the process by the
    Speech Dictionary Wizard where you will be given the option of recording a
    pronunciation for each word or phrase.

    So you need to add unusual words in the first place like your rubbish words
    so they are at least in the vocabulary. Got that?



    'Add from file' feature. (This is the article within the toolkit describing
    what it does)
    This feature will allow you to improve the accuracy of your "Language
    Model." It's not the same as adding words to your personal dictionary but
    works by taking the text that you pass it, parses it into words, and then
    records the relative frequencies of occurrence of each word with respect to
    the words around it. If you use documents that represent your style of
    speaking, this feature will improve dictation accuracy. (Which it does!)
    That is why I am getting between 98 to 99% accuracy as I have been saying
    since time immemorial!

    Currently only MS-Word 97-2003 (.doc) files, MS-Word 2007 (.docx) files and
    Text (.txt) files are recognized.

    Choose 'Browse' to locate your Word .doc file, then choose 'Begin Add From
    File' to begin.



    Parse - (verb) (used with object)
    1. to analyze (a sentence) in terms of grammatical constituents, identifying
    the parts of speech, syntactic relations, etc.
    2. to describe (a word in a sentence) grammatically, identifying the part of
    speech, inflectional form, syntactic function, etc.
    3. Computers. to analyze (a string of characters) in order to associate
    groups of characters with the syntactic units of the underlying grammar.




    'Train from text' feature. (This is the article within the toolkit
    describing what it does).


    The purpose of "Train from Text" is to improve the acoustic model of your
    user profile.

    We suggest you train from The Rainbow Passage below. This passage,
    developed by linguists, contains a good sampling of phonemes, individual
    sounds, found in the English language.

    This feature works best when you enunciate clearly and do not pause while
    reading. A pause in speaking will trigger the next page to load.

    If you wish to train other text, click (or say) 'Clear', then cut and paste
    desired text into the text box area below. When you are ready to begin
    training, click (or say) 'Begin Training'. The Speech Recognition Voice
    Training Wizard will guide you through the process.




    I believe both features should be used together. First, 'Add From File' and
    then 'Train From Text'. This is not to forget to add unusual words, adding
    them to the dictionary FIRST, and recording your pronunciation of that word
    INSTEAD of just putting documents through with dictated versions of your
    unusual word in the document that were not trained in the dictionary FIRST.





    Read above!


    Correct when said like that. Incorrect when used with context between them
    most of the time.

    More backtracking (realising your original mistake) and changing the
    statement from one of your previous posts where you said tutu was a homonym
    of to, too or two (which it is not) and not knowing what a near homonym is.


    This has all been covered in previous posts anyway that proved you wrong
    before ;-). Read my previous posts.



    Looks like you have a bad stutter there ;-).



    Change the record etc etc.




    It's a bit like you then isn't it.


    Maybe that's where you're going wrong then ;-).



    As far as I am aware, a homophone is virtually the same as a homonym so I
    have a doubt there. Okay, tutu is a homophone of what? You stated to, two
    or too. Show me the link to prove it and then I'll be happy seeing as I am
    answered your question on your 'document scanning feature.'



    Well done! How clever you are. I'm impressed ;-). Have you been
    practising at school as I told you?


    Do yourself a favour and buy the toolkit. Read the statements above on the
    features I have mentioned time and time again and then try it. You'll find
    the above will work just as in Preferred and it will enhance accuracy as it
    has done for me. 98 to 99% accuracy ;-).

    I'm sure even your poor doctors as you call them can afford $15.99.

    Poppycock! How would you know if you have not got it? Works very well
    using the toolkit. When you have actually tried it, then give a proper
    opinion. Until then, stop guessing and pissing in the wind!




    Correct as explained above but the toolkit works. Two different things
    asshole!




    The toolkit helps me take away any unnecessary burden and you know what they
    say, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it ;-).




    They won't fix something that is obsolete and where the WSR toolkit takes
    its place and does a fine job without it ;-).



    I thought you might be interested in this link.

    http://www.dragonvoicerecognition.com/dragon-professional.cfm



    Look under the heading: "Features for Dragon NaturallySpeaking professional
    solutions."


    .... And then just underneath the subheading: "Up to 99% Accurate and Three
    Times Faster than Typing.


    .... Read how many words per minute Dragon reckons most people can speak!
    Enjoy :).

    Andy t
     
    andy t, Feb 5, 2010
    #3
  4. andy t

    andy t Guest

    "Mark Conrad" I'm sure he has one brain cell left









    No they don't. ONLY YOU call it that because you made it up! It is known as
    the speech option, review facility in speech properties and nowhere in the
    speech properties does it say DOCUMENT SCANNING FEATURE YOU MORON!








    That's because all the useful information is in the toolkit THICKO because
    as I explained in my last post but one, the review facility does not work.
    GEEZE! I even copied some of the information from the toolkit from three of
    the accuracy improving features down for you in that post as well but I see
    you conveniently ignored them.


    You won't find them in the review facility because they are in the toolkit
    that is a TOTALLY SEPARATE AND INDEPENDENT PIECE OF SOFTWARE from the review
    facility. This is what gives me my 98 to 99% accuracy.






    But you are not kept in the dark because you know all about the toolkit that
    you have not tried yet because you are afraid to be proved wrong about the
    accuracy improvement it makes to WSR.



    Guess you will never know, will you? So keep using that redundant item if
    it keeps you happy in your twilight years while you wear your tutu around
    your two toes.


    (See in WSR, the right definition of 'wear' and 'two' came out above when
    spoken in context) ;-). It also does the same in Dragon Professional ;-).





    Detailed and accurate.





    And I agreed with you in my previous post that it does not work because you
    need the WSR toolkit, which DOES work. Which you do not have so you are not
    going to get WSR to be as accurate as I can get it, are you.






    If you find it confusing, stop using it and get a life!





    Do you mean the 'Speech Dictionary' that I successfully trained
    annulopapillary, would that bee be flying south and
    supercalifragilisticexpialidocious in? There it is again using WSR. Still
    there since I trained them. ;-)





    Not at all. Try to remember the proper names of things in future and word
    your posts properly then you may get further, quicker. Having said that, you
    probably cannot remember your own name. That is why you keep signing with
    your false one, Mark Conrad.





    No, because I have the WSR toolkit and get very few. So I've never had to do
    it. ;-).





    Not using the WSR toolkit it doesn't :).





    Not glossing over anything. Telling it like it is. I agreed with you the
    reviewing feature does not work. That's why I use the WSR toolkit that does
    work.





    Don't know. Why don't you join his forums and ask yourself? Or better still,
    buy the WSR toolkit that works and helps that will get you up to 98 to 99%
    accuracy with dictation.





    I doubt they'll lose any sleep over it especially with the billions they
    made with Windows 7.




    I doubt whether Microsoft will lose any sleep over that either. :))




    Can't wait!



    My pleasure. Shame you will forget what you read in it tomorrow. Sigh...
    Groundhog day all over again for you :(


    andy t
     
    andy t, Feb 5, 2010
    #4
  5. andy t

    andy t Guest

    "Mark Conrad" man or android?






    How old are you?


    Finally! At least you are agreeing that it does at last, as I've been
    telling you all along.



    Told you before, don't need medical jargon. For that, you will need $1600, +
    $200 for the KnowBrainer software to work with it (otherwise, the command
    side is a pile of shit) + eventually you will have to buy the show numbers
    software as well. (Very expensive for the whole shebang).



    Whereas WSR is free + the show numbers facility comes free with it + you get
    a complete operating system with it as well and the toolkit is only $15.99 +
    I have Dragon Professional and the KnowBrainer software. So with all that
    lot together, I have the complete works at my beck and call. (Which you do
    not have). A powerhouse of technology ;-). Very accurate and fast around the
    computer. Everything you can do and more.







    Told you before, I did not need the toolkit to complete that simple test. I
    explained how I did it before and was truthful with you. I can't speak for
    Marty but that's how I did it and it worked a treat. I will now swap to WSR
    and try it again.


    Would that bee be flying south? There it is again. Annulopapillary.
    Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious. Yep, without fail.






    I am getting a little fed up with you now. 1. I have already passed your
    pointless test. 2. It is pointless sentence and nonsensical in everyday
    language. 3. I've told you how I achieved it in a previous post. So NO MORE!
    Time for you to go back into your padded cell.







    That doesn't make sense (like you) and is no use to me or anybody else AT
    ALL. Nobody would EVER use that sentence. EVER!


    So what? Nonsensical sentences have no relationship to real life usage.
    Dragon has been refined for eighteen years while WSR has been worked on for
    approximately two years, from 2005 through 2007, with very little else done
    since.


    I use the Add from File function and see a difference. The other day I added
    several spinal reports on my condition and trained them. Approximately 1500
    words had four mistakes.


    Before I had the toolkit basically, back in the days when I first had the
    unfortunate pleasure of bumping into you and Grant X, I was not getting that
    accuracy then.





    If you are talking about in Dragon, you should be years ahead of me since
    you keep boasting you have been using it for umpteen years. Yet I have been
    using it since November last year AND I have the KnowBrainer software which
    you do not possess. So straight away I have some thousand more or so
    commands than you. Give me one more year with Dragon and I will be up there
    with the rest of them, especially where making macros is concerned with this
    software.


    With WSR, you would lose hands down because you do not possess the WSR
    toolkit for a start and you have only just started dabbling in it, whereas I
    have been using it for nearly 2 years now ;-)


    andy t
     
    andy t, Feb 6, 2010
    #5
  6. andy t

    andy t Guest

    "Mark Conrad" being proved wrong yet again ;-).










    Rome was not built in a day. Be patient young Mark.






    In which case you, or indeed even me, may not have to worry anyway.






    Some. I will agree with that but the examples I showed and a majority of
    others prove otherwise in the speech apps I have.







    You have already murdered that statement to death in nearly all your other
    posts and I've already answered that in previous posts and in fact the last
    one.


    Read my previous post.






    Yes, so you keep telling us in every single one of your posts. So what! It
    is a pointless exercise because being nonsense; you will never ever use it
    in everyday language.






    Yes I know. Are you teaching me to suck eggs now? That is why the WSR
    toolkit does not have a reviewer but does contain features that improve
    accuracy.


    Otherwise, explain why I am getting 98 to 99% accuracy with dictation using
    WSR?



    PLUS, YOU DO NOT NEED A REVIEWER AT ALL for the command side of a speech
    app. You cannot improve accuracy with commands, you can only make more or
    make them easier and I find the commands in WSR a little easier than Dragon
    for getting around the computer faster at the moment.


    You seem to forget that dictation is only one part of a speech app. The
    command side is equally as important. Some days I don't do ANY dictation and
    only use the command side in which case I would not enable Dragon for this
    purpose.


    You have just started to see the show numbers experience, which is easily
    one of the quickest ways around the system. This will definitely help
    Dragon become faster on that score along with the KnowBrainer software that
    adds some extra 1000 commands or so. But even with all this, I still find
    WSR quicker.


    I will give Dragon its due, there is one function that I do like which is
    quick. In 10.1, you can simply say "search the web for homonyms" or "search
    the web for pictures of the moon" and then it will find exactly what you
    want and bring up a list of links straight away. This is a nice feature.




    In that case it is a pointless exercise and null and void AND it does not
    prove anything.




    I'll stick with speech recognition if you don't mind and not your analogies
    of car garages.




    As the toolkit does not possess a reviewer, it cannot be broken. What it
    does have is other features that improve accuracy. I can vouch for this
    because I am getting 98 to 99% accuracy with dictation in WSR. A marked
    improvement before I used the toolkit and all for only $15.99.


    Plus you can also make text and command macros in it that I believe you
    cannot do in Preferred.






    If you are referring to the reviewer within it in speech properties, then I
    have already agreed that it does not work. Tell me something I don't know
    and read my previous posts.




    Impossible, seeing as there is no reviewer in it to break.




    Incorrect. Read my previous posts.



    The toolkit gives me 98 to 99% accuracy. Whereas before I had the toolkit,
    it was significantly lower.




    Poppycock! Works for me ;-).





    'I have adjusted defender'
    'The beads were braided'
    'I played the right chords on the piano'
    'Come and look at the next house'
    'He won a marginal seat'



    Just a few of the words you pointed out that needed correcting that came out
    first time and did not need correcting at all. I am not going to waste my
    time and do the rest because I know they will work.



    I will admit that the speech apps (ALL OF THEM) not only WSR can often get
    confused with small words such as "as" with "an" "all" with "or" "end" with
    "and" "and with an" "am" with "an" and a few others but I had no problem
    with your simple tasks.





    That's probably because it was you! An answer to the above question - STOP
    USING IT THEN! AND QUIT WHINING.




    And cost $200, comes without out KnowBrainer that costs another $200 comes
    without the show numbers that will cost another $29 whereas WSR is free,
    comes with a complete operating system and the toolkit is only $15.99.




    Nonsense! Not critical at all. Read my previous posts. I am getting 98 to
    99% accuracy using WSR.


    Critical: (adjective) essential. Absolutely, necessary for the success of
    something.


    Which of course is not true. Because, it is NOT absolutely, necessary ;-).






    It was the answer for me and it passed all your tests.


    Once again, there is no reviewing feature in the toolkit so if it is not
    there in the toolkit then it cannot be broken in the toolkit you numbskull!
    And "hack", "workaround", call it what you like but it works and if it ain't
    broke don't fix it ;-).




    The reason you specified not using the editor and putting it through the
    reviewer (which the toolkit does not have) is because you knew I would pass
    which I did with flying colours and no real effort needed ;-).


    Read my previous posts.




    I use the toolkit because it works ;-).






    Durr! I know!


    Tell me something I don't know and stop trying to teach me to suck eggs!






    The toolkit does not have a reviewer but using all the other features gives
    me 98 to 99% accuracy with dictation ;-). Read the above.





    I have Dragon Professional that has all those features and more than the
    Preferred version ;-).




    Wrong! Dragon has been refined for eighteen years while WSR was worked on
    for approximately two years, from 2005 through 2007 with very little else
    done since.



    WSR works fine with the toolkit. the WSR toolkit does not have any bugs.
    You do!


    Read my previous posts.


    look at what I just trained in WSR's speech dictionary
    this > Hepaticocholangiocholecystenterostomies


    I broke it down into syllables (as shown below) with very short pauses in
    between each one and it worked!!! ;-).
    hepati-cochol-angio-cholecy-stente-rostomies


    Hepaticocholangiocholecystenterostomies
    hepaticocholangiocholecystenterostomies
    hepaticocholangiocholecystenterostomies
    hepaticocholangiocholecystenterostomies


    These ones I dictated after I rebooted the computer to make sure ;-).
    Hepaticocholangiocholecystenterostomies
    hepaticocholangiocholecystenterostomies


    CONCLUSIVE PROOF THAT IT WORKS!!!


    If I can train that, I can train anything! As I've been saying all along.
    Read my previous posts!




    Don't let it bother you and stop using it if it does ;-).


    andy t
     
    andy t, Feb 9, 2010
    #6
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.