Re: How to maximize your frustration with computers

In article
<telamon_spamshield-D434D8.10513324052009@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Telamon <telamon_spamshield@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I use Mac and Windows XP because most engineering applications
are written for Windows.

Yeah, and it is not only the engineering apps that are
written for Windows.

"Productivity" apps like speech recognition have
a long history of being written for Windows, while
being as scarce as hens-teeth on the Mac platform.

Every hospital I know of, runs speech apps on XP or
Vista, _none_ of the hospitals use Macs.

Their preference is Vista, because they worry about
future support of XP.


I dread the eventual change to Vista
or Windows 7. I'll stick with XP as long as I can.

I know very little about either XP or Vista, being I
am a long-term Mac guy.

I have run the $1,600 Dragon medical version on both
the XP and Vista Ultimate OSs, can't detect any significant
difference in the performance of Dragon itself, other than
it takes Dragon somewhat longer to load up at first turn-on,
due to all the crap in the Vista OS.

Once loaded, Dragon gallops right along. For example, I timed
it on a 336 wpm session, and it kept up with my rapid dictation.

No text mistakes, BTW.

You can bet if I had mis-pronounced even one of those 336 words
during my 60 second test, Dragon would have kicked out
a text mistake.

Users normally talk between 60wpm to 200wpm depending
on the speaker and the complexity of their speech topic.

I run that expensive Dragon medical app' on Mac hardware,
a two year old MacBook Pro. (Vista in a 80 GB partition)




Back to MacSpeech Dictate
*****************

If MacSpeech ever ships the new version 1.5 to me, here is
the "accuracy" test I am going to subject the new version to.



I adjusted the line lengths to be no more than 55 characters,
by running a one-line-only version through BBEdit, and
adjusting the hard returns to be no more than 55 char's.




Needless to say, I expect at least 99% raw accuracy on the
following 188 "words", when MacSpeech hears the dictation
for the very first time.

That means I can only tolerate a maximum of 2 mistakes.




Beginning of Accuracy Test
------------------

Learning and Detecting Emergent Behavior in Networks of
Cardiac Myocytes

By Radu Grosu, Scott A. Smolka, Flavio Corradini, Anita
Wasilewska, Emilia Entcheva, and Ezio Bartocci


Abstract

We address the problem of specifying and detecting
emergent behavior in networks of cardiac myocytes,
spiral electric waves in particular, a precursor to
atrial and ventricular fibrillation. To solve this
problem we: (1) apply discrete mode abstraction to the
cycle-linear hybrid automata (CLHA) we have recently
developed for modeling the behavior of myocyte
networks; (2) introduce the new concept of spatial
superposition of CLHA modes; (3) develop a new spatial
logic, based on spatial superposition, for specifying
emergent behavior; (4) devise a new method for learning
the formulae of this logic from the spatial patterns
under investigation; and (5) apply bounded model
checking to detect the onset of spiral waves. We have
implemented our methodology as the EMERALD tool suite,
a component of our EHA framework for specification,
simulation, analysis, and control of excitable hybrid
automata. We illustrate the effectiveness of our
approach by applying EMERALD to the scalar electrical
fields produced by our CELLEXCITE simulation
environment for excitable-cell networks.

-----------------
End of Accuracy Test


With any luck, the new MacSpeech 1.5 version should arrive
here on Tuesday May 26th.
(I ordered the darn update on May 15th)

Can hardly wait to try it out on the above "Accuracy Test".

The text for that test came from page 97 of the 03/2009 issue
of the magazine "Communications of the ACM".

Needless to say, any new user of MacSpeech should not expect
the accuracy/speed that an experienced user can achieve.

If a new user dictated the above complex text, it would
very likely result in a real mess with a lot of text mistakes.

Mark-
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: OS/2 mentioned in a Vista review
    ... You can also install it in a classic way in 2K (and XP, and 2003 and Vista) by ... That may be a good basis of comparison for you, but to someone who is already displeased with the previous standard of operation of Windows, what should that mean? ... It can be done on XP or OS/2, ... Consider: full-screen apps. ...
    (comp.os.os2.misc)
  • Re: OS/2 mentioned in a Vista review
    ... The installation of device drivers was the major one that pops to mind. ... You can also install it in a classic way in 2K (and XP, and 2003 and Vista) by ... : full-screen apps. ... Windows is the ability to set the priority ...
    (comp.os.os2.misc)
  • Re: CP/M Source
    ... You can use Linux or Apple's OS X and use OpenOffice to read and write Word files. ... First of all, my livelihood depends a lot on being able to share files with other people, about 98% of whom are using Windows boxes. ... It may indeed be true that the files transfer between apps with no problems, but I'm not inclined to risk it without proof. ... My wife, whose most complex activities are exchanging emails on AOL and surfing the web, had to wipe and re-install Vista. ...
    (comp.os.cpm)
  • Re: What are Vistas problems.. really?
    ... VM, then that VM must run modern apps, not just "old" ones. ... Vista users are paying the ... I run Windows and Linux in VMs. ... partly it's just that Time Machine isn't very good on its own terms. ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: How to maximize your frustration with computers
    ... are written for Windows. ... and it is not only the engineering apps that are ... "Productivity" apps like speech recognition have ... I have run the $1,600 Dragon medical version on both ...
    (comp.sys.mac.system)