- John Gannon

Setting up Dragon Naturally Speaking Version 10 Professional has been interesting. I have installed it on my old Dell Inspiron 8200 laptop. My processor speed is a 1.9 GHz and I have 1 GB of RAM. I am running windows XP professional. This barely qualifies for the minimum standards for this latest version of Dragon. Nuance requires a minimum standard of 1 GHz processor speed and 512 of RAM. They suggest better performance occurs with a 2.6GHz processor or a 1.6 dual core processor and at least 1GB of RAM. Because my computer is so dated, Dragon has disabled some of the command properties that I would commonly use. According to the messages, this is necessary to allow my dictation to be displayed in a timely fashion. The Nuance promotional literature talks about how speech will be printed almost immediately with a computer that is equipped with a faster processor and more RAM.

- John Gannon

Hi everyone, I was just able to obtain some of the promotional material on the latest version of Dragon Naturally Speaking  version 10.  My first posting will be about the differences between the preferred version and the professional version. Hope this wets your appetite for more.

Read more ...

- John Gannon

Today's microphone, for review, is called the Buddy Flamingo microphone. It is another model from InSync Speech Technologies. This is a very different style of microphone than the stylus microphone we have previously shown although it is from the same manufacturer.

- John Gannon

Hi everyone! The latest microphone for review is very interesting. It is distributed by a company named InSync Speech Technologies. This Canadian company has obviously been thinking about tablet computers for quite a while. The microphone is called the Buddy Stylus Microphone.

This truly is a stylus and microphone combination. It is a USB device with drivers that are already built in. Talk about a 2-for-1 device! I have been using this microphone for the past several days in the office and I have to tell you it is a great concept.

The microphone has several unique features. First at the top of the microphone/stylus pen is a noise canceling microphone. High on the body of the stylus is a switch that acts as a mute toggle. The bottom half of the mute switch acts as an additional button that could be customized for a specific application. The bottom button acts as a mouse right-click button. The only unfortunate feature is that the microphone sits at the top of the stylus pen where we would commonly have an eraser. This is an unavoidable necessity as there truly is no other place for the microphone.

I have found the accuracy to be great. It is approximately 97% accurate after several days of good usage to establish user files. For all of you road warriors who asked me to test microphones in a car I have done so with this microphone. This is such a portable microphone it was easily used in my car. The accuracy did not degrade when I used it in the car even though the air conditioning was running at three quarters capacity.

The company's literature says that it is willing to work with individuals in terms of adapting the firmware to any unique circumstances. They said that they may be able to customize the stylus to suit unique applications.

Both emicrophones.com and Knowbrainer.com sell this stylus microphone for around $200.00. I would absolutely consider this as a great concept microphone. This is the only microphone company I have ever seen that took the needs of the tablet community seriously.

 

 

- John Gannon

I have spent the last week using the Revolabs xTag microphone in a variety of situations. At the end of all this testing I feel somewhat conflicted. There are many quality features that make this a very positive microphone. And then there are several features that really hold me back in screaming with joy.

First of all, I would like to thank Martin from emicrophones.com for his generosity in allowing us to test the past several microphones. He has been more than willing to help in any way that he can.

So, here is the review. Some days, the positives outweighed the negatives. On several days however, there were some negatives that interfered with me having an overall positive experience.

The accuracy was approximately 96 to 97%. This is a great quality of accuracy in my rating scale. Certainly, this microphone should absolutely be considered if you are looking for a wireless microphone.

I still continue to enjoy the idea of sitting back in my chair with no wires attached. I could easily grow used to having this as an everyday occurrence. I absolutely love wireless!

Interestingly, I found that the placement of the microphone would vary on what shirt I was wearing that day. I think it would absolutely make common sense to use the audio setup Wizard on Dragon NaturallySpeaking on a daily basis when using this microphone.

So why did I have problems? First off, any noise whatsoever would induce extra words being placed into a document. This microphone requires an absolutely quiet environment. No noise allowed! Even the fan on one of my laptop computers produced enough extra noise to induce extra words being placed into a document.

Secondly, every now and then the microphone would lose its pairing with the base station. This did not create a terrible problem. But it was an unnecessary problem. I can't give you the reason as to why this occurred.

The base station, small as it is, still is a base station. Although only the size of a pack of cigarettes for those who need a portable set up this would require Velcro to attach it to the computer. Overall, this is probably a small problem for someone who does want a wireless microphone.

Is it worth $249? Absolutely, if your conditions warrant using a wireless microphone in a very quiet environment. Ultimately, I think the accuracy would increase to probably 98% with very quiet conditions. I do think it might take several weeks of user files being developed to get to that point.

I know, I know! Everybody has been saying to me that they can't believe I would spend that much on a microphone. When you make your living using speech recognition this type of cost is negligible.

I want everybody to know I am still going to look at less expensive microphones. But when they let me loose in a candy shop and say take whatever you want, I really do like my fancy chocolates.

Next up: a microphone built into a stylus for use with tablet computers. I have been drooling to get my hands on this microphone. It makes so much common sense. I certainly hope it works extremely well.

- John Gannon

Looking for a microphone that is small? How about wireless, small and with good accuracy? My initial impression is that the Revolabs xTag supplies all of these answers.

The small amount of usage I have had while on vacation has given me the initial impression that this could be an excellent microphone in a QUIET environment. I will do a final thorough assessment when I return back from vacation and have several days to build up the user files in an office setting.

I have had to make more corrections using this microphone than I did with the Sennheiser microphone. This is not upsetting to me because my experience with most microphones is that almost all of them require several days of usage to get greater accuracy. Forget noise cancellation with this microphone. There doesn't appear to be much.

The physical appearance of the microphone is excellent. It is extremely well-made and size wise the actual microphone is approximately the same size as a tube of Chapstick. The base station is maybe 2" x 4" with a 1 inch depth. It connects via a USB port. There is also a small earpiece that connects via a wire to the actual microphone so that you can hear sound wirelessly. (I don't know how else to explain this, since there is an actual wire that connects the earpiece to the microphone. It does receive the signal wirelessly.)

 

 

                                            

 

 

 

Sadly, the microphone might be challenging to use if you are constantly moving around with your computer. Although the base station is small it would require some sort of Velcro apparatus to hold it to a computer.

I have to admit I love the idea of not being tethered by a wire. There really is something decadent when you can sit back in the chair and move freely without concern for snagging a wire.

I'll be back from vacation in several days. Hope this wets your appetite for the final outcome. Ultimately, I believe wireless is the future when it comes to microphones.

 

 

                                                                           

- Rob Bushway

Hilton Locke, a former Microsoft Tablet PC team member, posted a very interesting response to Craig's Microsoft Tablet PC Marketing article. He offers some unique observations, especially from someone who used to work on the team.

Here is what Hilton has to say regarding Microsoft, Tablet PC, and marketing:

I don't have any inside info on Windows marketing, but here are some of my observations.

1) The SKU shift to Tablet would be net positive, because Tablet features are only available on the higher-priced SKUs, but the volumes of machines sold is small. So marketing here might not be a good return on investment. Classic chicken-or-egg.

2) Volume growth has been in consumer/entry level systems and that area is terribly price-sensitive. The extra $50-$100 bill of materials costs tends to remove opportunities here. Business and professional users love Tablet (insurance adjusters and healthcare for example) but it's hard to convince the ISVs to Tablet-enable their apps. Without custom app support, the $50-100 cost difference for Tablets is an unnecessary expense. So the most common usage in business is still notebook with pen as "super-mouse". Not terribly compelling.

3) Tablet is part of the larger Windows organization. As such, it's limited in what it can do for marketing, since every message must be vetted at (large number) different levels, and must add to the overall Windows strategy. For an innovation group like Tablet, this is the kiss of death.

4) Microsoft is not the leader in defining pen and touch input interface standards. Pen and touch digitizers have been around for a lot longer than Tablet, so the digitizer technology is relatively mature. A variety of niche solutions in this space has yet to be molded together into a larger standard. Standards again cost a little more in the beginning, as existing drivers and software are rewritten to the standard. Why isn't MS investing here?

As you know, I blogged about Tablet marketing in Dec07 http://blogs.msdn.com/hiltonl and took a lot of heat. It's also widely known thanks to the "Vista Capable" fiasco, that no marketing decision made inside of Windows is done in isolation.

IMHO, Tablet is likely to die a slow and ignominious death within Windows as it is absorbed into a larger "Natural input" movement. Note how touch, speech and visual recognition are the new darlings. Touch input is the only Windows-team-owned "darling". Microsoft's big challenge will be to figure out how to get Windows developers excited about NI as a whole.

- John Gannon

The testing is in! The Sennheiser ME3--N has turned out to be a phenomenal microphone. I have used it for a number of days in everyday practice. The final accuracy appears to be right around 98%. I have found this microphone at least as accurate as my highly rated Sennheiser M.D431. The cost for the Sennheiser headset is significantly less than the handheld. With an Andrea USB sound pod and the headset microphone, the cost is still less than $200 at emicrophones.com.

 

                                                                       

 

My first day of use with this microphone found approximately 99% accuracy. The accuracy level did decrease (very minimally) over the next several days. But the accuracy did stay at 98% over all. My assessment of the ME3 parallels others who have tested this microphone. Previous postings on microphone sites found the ME3 to be approximately at 98% efficiency.

 

                                                                     

 

Why wouldn't you want to consider this microphone? I found it somewhat problematic fitting it on my head with my glasses. If this is a microphone that you would be constantly taking on and off 20 or 30 times per day you would either find a way to overcome this problem or be upset by it.

Another issue might be having a cord. Although not overly long, it is still a cord and one more thing to consider.

                                                                  

I did not go into the car as I had promised. I am on vacation and where we are staying is approximately 98°. However, I am staying with many people so the noise quotient is very high. With this in mind, I did find a drop in efficiency while testing with a ton of background noise. Approximately 96 or 97% accuracy. I think this would also be equivalent to working in the car with an air conditioner. I promise that future testing with microphones will include car testing when the temperature is reasonable.

So how much did I really like this microphone? Enough where I am going to use it instead of my handheld on an everyday basis. Will I figure a workaround with how this fits on my head? For this type of accuracy, absolutely!

Remember, everybody's mileage varies when using microphones. Many others have commented that they also have had this high of recognition.

Here's what I would like to do with future tests: I would like to have a rating scale consisting of fair, good, great and excellent. A fair microphone would really not be something you would use on a daily basis. A good microphone would be usable but require constant correction. A great microphone would require correction but with the passage of time recognition accuracy would increase. An excellent microphone has great accuracy out of the box and maintains it with the passage of time.

John's rating for the Sennheiser headset microphone: EXCELLENT, based on high accuracy out of the box, great accuracy in a very noisy environment, and ease of use.

- John Gannon

98 -- 99% accuracy on day one! That sort of says it all doesn't it? I have never used a microphone that had that degree of proficiency out of the box. Even my trusty Sennheiser 431 MD always has required several days of use before it becomes 98% recognition accuracy.

So for those who are questioning what type of microphone would be useful, this absolutely has to be a contender. Remember though, this is a headset microphone. It is actually a behind the head headset, but it is still a headset.

I set up the ME3- N by creating a new user file and importing my commands and my vocabulary. I am also connected to my computer via an Andrea USB sound pod.  This is the same type of connection I use with my Sennheiser 431 M.D. I will keep you posted.

But 98/99% accuracy says a lot about this microphone.

- John Gannon

Wow, here is some exciting news. I have already received two of the many microphones I want to review. The first, courtesy of emicrophones.com is the Sennheiser ME3-N. I have set up this microphone and created a user file and already I can tell the recognition accuracy is going to be high.

I will use this microphone in the office for the next several days. For those who asked, I will be taking my tablet out into the car with the microphone and attempt to re-create some conditions that people have asked me to test microphones in.

Previous reviews have given this microphone a “High Five” for speech recognition usage. I will be posting some pictures of this microphone in action as soon as I have some time to take and download them. In the meantime I will post my first attempts of photographing microphones. (Please do not laugh at my first attempts)

Over the next week, I will also attempt to set up the Revolabs lapel microphone. This is a wireless microphone and I have read good reports about this microphone also. The only downside that I have read is that it is not very noise canceling. Also to come, posting pictures of the Revolabs microphone.

 

 

 

 

Okay, even I am laughing at my first attempt of posting microphone pictures. Well, it can only get better.

- John Gannon

This microphone article is going to reveal my secret inner geek qualities. I'm going to show a part of myself that never is revealed to anyone other than my family. It may border on appearing as though I use a pocket protector. Yes, unfortunately, I am a closet microphone freak. I've tried to hide it from the world and here I am today publicly acknowledging it to all of you. I recognize that the first step in recovery is acknowledging a problem. I just don't know if I want to recover.

Over the years I have acquired, thrown out, given away, used as a doorstop and done many other things with microphones. I am always on the eternal quest to find the perfect microphone. I have had some that I have loved and some that I have despised, but all have left an impression upon me.

I have been an avid reader of all the details about these microphones. I hardly understand any of the mechanical properties of microphones, but I know a good one when I use it.

Obviously, there is a reason for my passion over microphones. Speech recognition works well. I know that to be a fact. I hope you are starting to believe that it works well also. But, speech recognition works poorly with a poor microphone. Speech recognition works okay with a good microphone while speech recognition can be positively mind blowing with an excellent microphone.

The debate about the perfect microphone has been endless in the 10 years that I have used speech. People have been vehement that they have found nirvana. Others will verbally strike back stating that the person does not know what they are talking about.

Here is my first rule to prepare for when using speech recognition and researching microphones: No microphone is perfect for everyone!!! Do not be tricked into thinking that the microphone which is perfect for me will be perfect for you. Many microphones will work well for a number of people. Trial and error is required to find the best microphone for your unique set of circumstances.

Financial cost for a microphone? It can be high. Emotional cost? Not really at all when you have the right microphone. However, there is a high emotional cost with the wrong microphone. A poorly suited microphone will bring out words from my mouth that would have me arrested in Kansas. I could just scream over the amount of times I have said one thing and had something else show up on the screen. Sometimes, it is because I did not enunciate well. Other times, it has been from a poor choice of microphone.

I have a Motion 1600 tablet that I use daily in my office.. For several years I used the built-in array microphone. It worked great. Approximately 96% accuracy. My problem began when I acknowledged to myself that my history of having 98% accuracy with a hand-held microphone would not allow me to be satisfied with 96% accuracy. I struggled with this knowledge for several months. I loved not having a microphone. I loved speaking directly into my computer and I hated how the Motion would miss the small words.

Months ago, I went back to my "Gold Standard" microphone. It is the Sennheiser M.D431. This microphone is openly acknowledged to be the best microphone for speech recognition . True speech recognition experts use this as the standard to which all other microphones are compared. It makes the 2% difference that saves me from going crazy. It gets the small words such as a, and, an, in, the.

One of the most peculiar things about speech recognition for a beginner is finding out that speech recognition actually can and easily understands many complex words. Most corrections occur as a result of missing small words or words that are a plural. This is why the microphone becomes such an important feature. Without a good quality microphone the small words will constantly be misinterpreted. No amount of training will solve the problem. Only a great microphone can save the day.

Let's go into the cost of the microphone. Unfortunately, excellent microphones cost significant amounts of money. My Sennheiser microphone was almost $500. Then again, it is the "Gold Standard." Many other high quality microphones will not cost anywhere near this amount but may cost several hundred dollars. Inexpensive microphones that use the term "speech recognition" on the box may not actually be proficient for true speech recognition.

Do not be misled when it comes to buying a microphone. This is one of the very few times when I think the only place to buy a microphone is over the Internet. There are several websites dedicated to high quality speech recognition microphones.

emicrophones.com is the first site I would suggest. I have found them to be ethical and extremely knowledgeable about speech recognition microphones. Secondly, I would suggest Knowbrainer. Knowbrainer is perhaps the most knowledgeable site when it comes to speech recognition. However, I would place this site second when it comes to microphones. Others may disagree with my priorities; but I have found several reasons not pertinent to this article to support my belief.

I've begun to contact several Internet microphone sites and have been successful in obtaining evaluation microphones that are relevant to speech recognition and tablet computers. I've also contacted several manufacturers and they have agreed to send microphones that are relevant for tablets.

Now I want your help. I'm hoping some of you have specific requests of microphones that you would like to see evaluated. Who knows, I may have already ordered some of these microphones, but I am hoping that others may have ideas that I have not thought about. All suggestions are greatly appreciated.

Those who are interested in speech recognition as a primary input device should find the next several months exciting! I am about to start assessing tablet computers and specific microphones to see how they interact with each other.

Don't forget, I too am an interested party with what works best. I promise you I will give unbiased opinions. I'm on a quest. I want to replace my tablet computer with something that gives me even greater accuracy.

Maybe I can find with your help the perfect tablet that has an array microphone that allows 98% accuracy. Maybe together we can find a wireless microphone with a tablet that offers 99% accuracy. Perhaps nirvana at 100%. Don't be afraid to offer your suggestions. Collectively, we should come up with the 2008 ultimate power user, state-of-the-art, speech recognition/tablet combination.

- Rob Bushway

Microsoft's Rob Chamberlin points to a great new tool from the Office Labs team called Search Commands, which helps you find commands, options, and wizards in Office apps. Rob takes the Search Commands a bit further by developing a speech macro for it. Check it out!

- John Gannon

I received an email earlier today that shows Nuance is  discounting Dragon Professional and Legal versions for 50% until June 30.  Sale prices are 499.99 for the Professional and 695.00 for the Legal.  Here is the site:  Hope some of you will take advantage after reading about how useful speech recognition can be.

- John Gannon

Several comments regarding previous articles have had people asking me to explain more about macros. Vista speech recognition is currently beta testing their macros and I cannot comment about them since I have not used Vista speech as of yet. (I will be testing Vista speech in the near future.) Macros are not available for XP speech. Dragon Speech recognition offers the opportunity to create macros which I like to term "cheats". I use the term “cheats” as a way of describing complex tasks made extremely simple by using voice commands. These voice commands set off a chain of events ultimately ending in whatever task completion you have arranged the macro to do.

Here are several examples describing how macros can be applied. First, Dragon speech can create voice commands for almost any software application. If you commonly use repeated paragraphs or sentences of text (this is a common occurrence in healthcare applications) text blocks can be inserted. We can use a voice command to do complex keyboard sequences that are time consuming or difficult to perform. Data can be entered in one area of a program and used in multiple applications.

I was not aware before researching this article on macros, but I have now discovered that you can use macros with QuickBooks or AutoCAD.

Let's get a little bit more detail about what types of things Dragon macros can do. Imagine that you often cut-and-paste from one document into another document. We can create a voice command that automatically does this for you. You no longer have to move your cursor or use keystrokes to create a cut command or a paste command.

Think of all the steps necessary for this common task. You must put your cursor over edit. You must then choose cut or copy. You must then paste the material into a new article.

This can be done automatically with a macro. I use this speech command already and it is a timesaver. I know that when I do it by hand it can take 10 to 15 seconds. When I use it with a macro it takes approximately 3 to four seconds. Granted, this is not hours of time saved. However, I may use this command six times a day. I might gain several minutes each day. Over the course of a week I have gained maybe 10 to 15 minutes. Over the course of a month that may turn into an hour. Over the course of the year that's many hours.

Imagine that you wanted to place last week's date in a specific spot in a document. You can create a command for this. How about next weeks date?  Say a command.  No looking for the date, no pulling up the calendar (and in my case screwing up the time while I find the right date.)

I have created commands which take demographic information about people such as name and address and age and placed it into formal fields in a chart. Get the information onetime and I can apply it to several applications all at once. Just by my voice. No keyboard, no stylus, just my Sennheiser 431 microphone. Neat, huh?

Dragon Naturally Speaking creates these macros by using a specialized area in the program called the Command Browser. I will admit I am not very sophisticated or skilled in creating macro commands. The guru of commands for Dragon is a person named Larry Allen. He has written a fantastic book called "Scripting for Dragon Naturally Speaking". This book has made it possible for a beginner in macros to learn basic steps. He also takes you all the way up to very sophisticated programs. Anything that you want to do via keyboard can be done with the use of a macro. All the necessary steps in the keyboard are done automatically and much more swiftly. It is amazing how much time this can save.

I understand that the concept of the macro may be hard to grasp. Most people seem to be aware of only the ability to use speech recognition to transcribe text. Speech recognition is a much more powerful tool than just a transcription device. With the use of macros one can easily make timesaving mechanisms that allow a computer to be used more effectively in every day applications.

- John Gannon

I installed the Microsoft speech engine this past weekend and played around with it. I have to admit that I’m not overly pleased by Microsoft XP Speech Recognition. I found it cumbersome and not very intuitive. Perhaps I am overly used to working with Dragon Naturally Speaking. The recognition accuracy with the Microsoft system was not terrible but making corrections was extremely slow and in my opinion, not as easily done as in Dragon.

I dictated this article with the Microsoft speech engine and have had approximately 96% accuracy. However, it does not seem to recognize commands easily. In fact it takes multiple tries to get it to recognize a command on occasion. I still do not think it is something I would want to use on a daily basis and multiple times per day.

The lack of being able to make macros, the lack of usability for all my programs, the lack of saving user files and being able to move them and save them makes me recognize that the Dragon program I have really works well for me.

Overall, I can see why there is a difference between a program that I have paid for and a program that comes with the software on the machine. One program feels like a beginners model while the other feels as though it is truly a working level program. I still hold to my position that the Microsoft XP speech is effective in terms of making people aware that speech recognition does exist. I do not think this is a program that would excite people and get them to believe there is truly a good reason to use speech recognition on a regular basis. I might find the Microsoft version useful if I needed to dictate only rarely.

I know that my opinion is just my opinion, but again I am a heavy user of Dragon and find the ease of navigating with Dragon to be one of the reasons why it works well.

It was interesting when I was researching the differences between the three versions of Dragon Naturally Speaking. Several people whose opinions I respect greatly in the field of speech recognition were very clear that they also found the Microsoft system to be less than adequate. They also found that Dragon Naturally Speaking Standard Edition to be less than effective. Perhaps the Vista version with their Macro ability and improved accuracy will be better than the XP version.

I will be testing the Vista speech version shortly. Hopefully, there are changes with the Vista program that allow more user friendliness. In the meantime back to my Dragon.

- John Gannon

Boy oh boy, people are tough! Just several days on the job and I did not expect the amount of comments that are already taking place regarding the differences between the three versions of Dragon Naturally Speaking.

This article was originally going to be about what I use Dragon for. I now recognize that I must become much more of an expert rather than a heavy user of Dragon to keep up with all of these requests.

I still am going to go ahead with what I had originally thought I wanted to write about. I will additionally write about what everybody wants me to write about.

With the forum comments in mind I did do some research in terms of the differences between the three versions. I want to remind everybody that I always have used the professional version. In the speech forum groups I've participated heavily in over the years, those members also used the professional version and it was very unusual to have anyone that used preferred. Standard version was never acknowledged or seen on the sites.

There are primarily three functional reasons why people use speech recognition. First, dictation can be changed from spoken language and transcribed into text. Secondly, Dragon allows you to control all aspects of your computer by using speech commands. Finally, there is a text to speech component where written text is allowed to be played back for a listener.

Reasons for using speech recognition vary. I use it because of my poor typing skills. Many others seem to use it for this reason also. Those with physical disabilities have found that Dragon can allow them to navigate successfully through all aspects of their computer. There is no reason to use an external keyboard or an external mouse when using Dragon. The only time human intervention is necessary is to turn the computer on. Dragon can even successfully shut down the computer. The text-to-speech function is great for blind people. They can select material and hear it played back to them.

Here are some examples as to how I use Dragon daily. Imagine that I want to write a letter to someone. I actually can just say the technical term "Letterhead" and this will open up a document with my letterhead, my address and my professional designations all nicely done in a print style of my choice. After I dictate the body of my letter I can then say the term "salutation" and it will then dictate my name, and my professional titles.

What is neat about this is that I have created what is called a "macro." This means that it knows how to indent my salutation, it knows the style of type that I want, and it knows where to place it in the letterhead. My 1-word command does many things.

Another example of a macro is how I open up patient notes in my electronic medical record. I use the term "do it." This command opens up all of my patient notes for a particular person, goes to the end of all the documents, starts a new paragraph, puts in the date for today, starts another new paragraph and places the cursor for me. I have timed this when I do it manually or just through regular speech recognition. It can take up to 10 seconds to do this. When I voice this one command it takes approximately 2 to three seconds. Wow! Is this crazy or what?

Now here's some more information... Ouch! Oh no! I have reinjured my index finger. Once again I have done a "George Jetson." I'll be back in a minute after I put the bandage on.

Okay, I'm back. But now what? I can no longer right-click or left click with the mouse. I can no longer scroll the touchpad with my index finger. This Article Will Not Get Done in Time! I'll have an editor very upset with me!

Luckily, I have Dragon Professional. It's as easy as me saying to my microphone "double-click." Yes, I am able to control my whole computer through my microphone. Sure I have to remember all the commands, but once memorized I no longer need my keyboard. I can even create a grid on my screen that allows me to place my mouse cursor precisely where I want it.

All right, all right. Now I'll attempt to talk about the differences between the three versions. Dragon standard has to be bought with each new version. You cannot buy an upgrade. This means that ultimately it might be cheaper to buy a preferred version. The most important feature of why it is important to have the preferred over the standard version is the ability to manage the user files. A user file is created every time a user speaks and updated every time the user speaks. The updates occur when we make corrections. A good user file takes time to create. The difference between good accuracy and only fair to poor accuracy is a good user file. Having to start all over with a user file can be maddening for the first week. The preferred version also has the ability to do some basic text macros. This is not possible in the standard version. The standard version does not offer text macros or any type of macros. The professional version can offer specialized vocabularies. The professional version can also do the network profile which was spoken about earlier in the forum. I have not had to use a network profile and I am not familiar with it. The professional version is integrated with Outlook. The professional version also can import and export the user file and also the vocabulary independently. The ability to use sophisticated macros occurs only in the professional version. I only have one or two of these sophisticated macros but I am lost without them.

I still hold to the belief that many people can get by with the preferred version. I understand that people are having success with the standard version, but I believe that there are limitations that make it less user friendly. I personally, could not be successful the way I am successful with speech recognition by using the preferred version. I do require these precise technical macros. They have made my life much easier. I freely acknowledge that it was very expensive for me to set up my version of Dragon professional. I feel that the cost is more than justified by the time that it saves me and the ability to work effectively.

So, are you getting the itch yet to try speech? Or are you nervous that speech is too much work for too little outcome? I am here to try and help you overcome your hesitation with speech. I personally know it can be a fantastic way to work with the computer! I hope I can sell you on the merits that speech recognition brings to tablet computers.

- Rob Bushway

Ever have those moments in a presentation when you have wandered away from your PC, without a mouse, and needed to advance the slide in your PowerPoint presentation?

Microsoft's Rob Chambers has a solution for you in this Vista Speech macro that will advance or go to the previous slide just by speaking the words "next slide" or "previous slide".

Rob also mentions this wireless USB mic that he's been using for presentations that allows him that freedom to move about and speak to the computer: the Revolabs xTag Lapel USB Wireless Mic that retails for $249.

 

 

 

 

- John Gannon

Today's article will explain in a little more detail about the history of Dragon Naturally Speaking. Dragon was first developed in the 1980s. The first version was called Dragon Dictate and according to Wikipedia it cost $9,000 for a user license. Over the next several years the price dropped and the quality of the program increased. It has been owned by four different Corporations and is now owned by Nuance Corporation.

There are three different versions of Dragon. The first is called Standard Edition and it is equivalent to the Microsoft speech recognition program. These are both very basic speech recognition systems and they are lackluster in performance and features. Unfortunately, both of these programs are proficient just enough to make many end users frustrated and ultimately discouraged about the idea of speech recognition. The next version of Dragon is called Dragon Preferred. This is a much more functional system and it is a consumer-based model. It has many more features than the Standard Edition and is much more usable and user friendly. A final version is called Dragon Professional and incorporates all of the features of the previous two models and additional features. In addition to Dragon Professional there are also two specialized programs that are based on the professional model. These are the legal version and the medical version. Both have additional vocabulary and features that are helpful in both of those fields.

The cost for the Standard Edition is $99.99. The Preferred edition is $199.99 while the professional version is $899. Those that stick with speech recognition do not seem to use the Standard Edition. The Standard Edition seems to be for a novelty purpose primarily and I would not suggest it if you are going to use speech on any regular basis.. The preferred edition and the professional version are functional daily driver software programs.

Basic requirements for usage on a computer are fairly hefty. My program takes up 203 MB of space. I looked earlier today and none of my other programs come even close to using that amount of space. According to Nuance, Dragon requires only a Pentium one processor and 512 ram. My experience is quite different. I have found that Dragon is a memory hog and resource heavy software program. Bigger and badder computers work better with Dragon. Dragon seems to play primarily in the RAM so you can never have enough RAM. Since the 32-bit operating systems can only have 3 GB of RAM my suggestion would be to use as much RAM as you can afford. Lack of power means delay in the text being printed on the screen and more time consumption with making corrections.

Speed and power with a computer are only one of the necessary ingredients for good results with Dragon. Recognition accuracy will be increased also by the quality of the microphone and with the speech habits of the end user. Stay tuned for more upcoming articles. Next time: “What Can Dragon DO? Or more realistically… “What Do I Remember About What Dragon Can Do?”

- Rob Bushway

As I mentioned several weeks ago, we are rounding out the natural input technologies that we cover on GottaBeMobile.com, by adding speech recognition to our regular content coverage.

Well, good news is in store.

John Gannon has agreed to come on board as a contributing writer for GBM covering speech recognition. As a self-described heavy user of speech recognition, John is going to focus on the day to day usability of speech recognition, training, accessories, and more.

Here is a little background on John. I'll let him introduce himself further with his first post:

John is a a licensed psychologist who specializes in marriage and family issues.  He is also board certified in psychopharmocology. 

John uses a Motion Computing LE1600 as his work computer in his day to day counseling.  He is primarily a Dragon Naturally Speaking user, spending 40+ hours a week on the program. However, I'm sure John will also talk about Vista Speech Recognition and the in's and out's about various Microsoft solution. John describes himself as a "poor and slow typist", thus his heavy reliance on speech recognition technologies.

John has  been married for 26 years with two kids, and sculls 7 miles a day for relaxation.

Welcome aboard, John!