However, no matter how you turn it in the end the machine has to recognize (or whatever you'd like to call it) your command and then execute the correct macro. If it works like some voice recognition "customer service" outfits it's 50% hit or miss. I wouldn't want that in an industrial environment.
Ham radio operators (I am one) know how tricky that can be even for a human when dealing with noise plus a heavy accent. So they, the military guys and lots of others use special words. An example: They say "niner" instead of "nine", to avoid a mix up with "five". It is quite tough to make voice recognition work reliably without at least some modification of speech. Also, simply dismissing accents ain't going to fly anymore, considering that more than a third of Californians have some kind of accent. Heck, even our governor does. IOW, machine recognition has to be able to deal with that or it's not working right. Same when a guy from Kentucky talks to a PC that was programmed by a New Yorker.
Sure, so long as you don't want to actually run any software on it.
If you do, then you quickly end up having to give everyone Administrator access, which largely defeats the purpose of having access controls.
And, more importantly, that most of the "controls" get *turned off*. So you don't actually get any more security, it just makes it easier for MS to respond to security issues with "it was the user's decision".
All of the common OSes suffer from the problem that if you can run an exploit under the user's account, you can do anything that the user can do. For a desktop system, that's almost everything (if you can compromise the user's normal account, you can usually leverage that into Administrator access one way or another).
If you want real security, you need role-based access control, along the lines of SELinux. But that's far too complex for most users to administer.
OTOH, if you're trying to remotely compromise a running system, an encrypted drive won't help at all.
It's not a "scripting" language, it's a general-purpose programming language (one which is interpreted rather than compiled).
I'm not sure why you consider it to be "ideologically driven"; if you can clarify that, then people might be able to express opinions on the matter.
All languages tend to have some kind of general design "philosophy" (otherwise they end up a complete mess, like perl). My experience of language wars has left me with the impression that "ideology" is usually a shorthand for "design choice with which I disagree".
With anything reasonably modern and popular, such that it sports the "Windows" compatibility sticker, this isn't the case at all. I can't think of anything I still run today that doesn't work correctly with a regular user account, but I also can't think of anything I still run today that hasn't been updated in at least the past two years.
Well, yes, this is true. But the fact that Microsoft is throwing (a lot of) money at the problems suggests to me it's not entirely about trying to buy themselve an excuse for poor security.
I've got some specialty filter design programs that haven't been updated in, oh, 15+ years or so. Usually because the group around a university professor disbanded after he retired. Pretty sad, in academia there isn't much continuity in that respect.
It's not just that. I bet they are also throwing a lot of money at fixing Vista after they seemed to have made a fateful decision not to pay much attention to backward compatibility. I have seen quite a bit of SW that won't run on Vista but on pretty much all previous Windows versions.
I dropped a line to Jeff Kahler of Nuhertz fame suggesting he might add wave digital filters to his program, but he wasn't particularly enthusiastic in his response. :-) Something about not having much free time, limited market, etc., as usual!
No it wont, like I said before, .net 2.0 will run alongside .net 1.1. Both can be installed and have no affect on each other. Your scope app will just call into the assmeblies that were specified when it was compiled. In fact, if you had .net 2.0 installed, and you then installed .net 1.1, then both will be currently installed on your PC. Have a look at C:\Windows\Microsoft.NET\Framework and you will probably see multiple frameworks installed. I have 4 versions.
In DOS we jsut wrote directly to the UART :) Now the UART is hidden behind a layer of abstraction so every app does not need a special driver to talk to all the different UARTS!
Remember those days where you had to find a video card that was compatible with your EDA software drivers?
This it true, but there are plenty of methods out there to prevent remote execution of code. Fact is, that no system is truly secure, it is only secure to the n'th degree. It is only when you think your system is totally secure that you are most vunerable.
I tried this: Installed 2.0, scope didn't work. Installed 1.1, scope worked. Installed 2.0 again, scope quit. Ok, maybe I did something wrong but I still do not understand why a higher version or any environment is unable to run legacy stuff. I can run my 1980's DOS programs under XP. All of them.
Yep, painful memories. Then again, at least they usually allowed a generic mode under which (in my case) every software worked. I ran Orcad in 640*480 all the time, except on my first laptop which had less resolution. Basically I could still live with that today, it was good enough.
The market is limited because hardly anyone knows WDF. The restrictive access to publications that organizations such as IEEE afford their members doesn't exactly help either, to the point where one has to ask oneself whether a paper submission makes sense anymore.
WDF are great for battery powered apps. AFAIK there still isn't any DSP that comes close to the frugality of a MSP430. When cost weighs in as well you generally have to forego the luxury of a HW multiplier.
There are some papers but only practice hones the skills with such filters. For example, you have to carefully assign decimation levels or the computational load will quickly suffocate a little uC. To do that without some CAD help can get old.
Not for long. As I said then I hang up and move on.
For making appointments, getting a prescription etc.? Ours don't.
?
Yes. Have you?
Here is the crux, they can't operate on just a few words. There are usually lots of sub-menus, numbers and addresses to be confirmed, and so on. Ok, case in point, how many people do you think are there that would be able to pronounce Hauppauge (NY State) correctly? People who live there excluded. What if someone has to speak a foreign location into the system because he or she is currently on an assignment there and wants a new order of checks sent there? What if that person is not in the military or a ham radio operator and does not know the NATO spelling alphabet?
With macros you may have it easier because you can assign them less ambiguous terms.
Nah. With few exceptions I expect technology to adapt to humans, not humans adapt to technology. That's why there are engineers, to make that happen ;-)
I generally find that saying, "Fuck it", to a voice "recognition" system gets you a human operator ;-)
This site...
formatting link
shows how to circumvent many of the "support" websites and get to a human.
...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona Voice:(480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax:(480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |
| http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |
America: Land of the Free, Because of the Brave
Another surprising facet was the number of times where I as a customer had to tell their IT folks that part of the system had broken. In one case I also had to tell them how to temporarily fix it.
No frustration. It just irks me that proven technology is often tossed out in favor of something that doesn't work as good. Many companies keep the touch tone command set in parallel, then it's ok.
Again, it's not about simple yes and know. Coincidentally many people here in the neighborhood share my opinion. Older folks are often close to a tantrum.
Not my attorney AFAIK. But yes, some might. Courts still use reporters out here though.
We know them long enough. The family doc writes everything on a PC, the dentist even shuns that tool and also doesn't believe in Email (doesn't have any but he is the best dentist I ever had). That's about all the docs we need right now. Interestingly, this dentist is otherwise extremely open to new medical technology.
Hey, you are selectively snipping here. Have you been in the military?
Similar. They say "Neu-en" instead of "Neun", making it two syllables. You can rest assured that my assertions are based on real exposure. Most of the time I was NATO-assigned so the English alphabet and numbering was used. Same in ham radio, even when speaking German or Dutch.
Please don't snip half sentences, makes it tough to follow.
Firemen, police, OES, California Department of Forestry (for example when they fly missions because one misunderstanding can be deadly), etc.
Gimme the buttons back ;-)
Again, read on and don't snip after the first phrase. What I meant was the content in the sub-menus. As within programming, once you get there you often have to enter more complicated information. Such as a complete street address.
His accent is indeed a bit thick, no idea why, after so much time in the US. Plus he always speaks English at home with Maria and the kids. With me it's the other way around, I really like him as a governor but not as and actor, and I don't like his movies.
Most people cannot pronounce it (phonetically). Most of the ones I've met said "Hoppag". They butcher it, just as they butcher my first name (which is ok because it sounds Scandinavian and that's not easy).
Huh?
"Hei-del-berg? Please en-ter ci-ty a-gain. Do not re-cog-nize en-try".
Yes. People say it's not very noticeable but other folks of German descent can almost pinpoint the area where I grew up. Some locals think I am Scottish, others think Canadian.
Yes, when they make the submenu structures too deep and it costs too much time. Or when they let off a freaking commercial before every number. "If you want to inquire about our world-class, prize-winning xyz gizmo that is currently on sales at the following stores .... press 7".
---> click.
Well, right now I'll have to design filters, then debug prototypes fresh from fab, then ...
But I'll keep an eye out. In fact, I got very close to a project in the medical field (recognizing voice defects) but we could not secure venture funding at that time. Might happen though, and then you'd see me in groups like the above.
Joerg snipped-for-privacy@removethispacbell.net posted to sci.electronics.design:
Actually that is pretty impressive from a DOS boot disk. By the time of DRDOS 6 or MSDOS 3.3 (i think) for WFW the install for DOS was about 4 to 7 floppies. A decent bootable DOS was available up through win98.
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.