Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > alt.os.linux > #38742 > unrolled thread

dictation without internet?

Back to article view | Back to alt.os.linux

Contents

  dictation without internet? crankypuss <undisclosedUserid@gmail.com> - 2016-09-11 15:48 -0600
    Re: dictation without internet? "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@invalid.es> - 2016-09-12 00:48 +0200
      Re: TTS on GPS (was: dictation without internet?) "W. Wesley Groleau" <Groleau+News@FreeShell.org> - 2016-09-11 22:12 -0500
        Re: TTS on GPS "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@invalid.es> - 2016-09-12 14:16 +0200
          Re: TTS on GPS Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2016-09-13 10:30 +0000
        Re: TTS on GPS (was: dictation without internet?) Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2016-09-12 10:20 -0700
      Re: dictation without internet? crankypuss <undisclosedUserid@gmail.com> - 2016-09-12 10:36 -0600
        Re: dictation without internet? "W. Wesley Groleau" <Groleau+News@FreeShell.org> - 2016-09-12 16:29 -0500
          Re: dictation without internet? crankypuss <undisclosedUserid@gmail.com> - 2016-09-13 09:34 -0600
    Re: dictation without internet? VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2016-09-12 01:06 -0500
      Re: dictation without internet? Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2016-09-12 07:54 +0000
        Re: dictation without internet? "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@invalid.es> - 2016-09-12 14:19 +0200
          Re: dictation without internet? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2016-09-12 17:01 +0000
            Re: dictation without internet? "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@invalid.es> - 2016-09-12 20:23 +0200
              Re: dictation without internet? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2016-09-12 19:35 +0000
        Re: dictation without internet? VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2016-09-13 02:42 -0500
      Re: dictation without internet? crankypuss <undisclosedUserid@gmail.com> - 2016-09-12 10:50 -0600
        Re: dictation without internet? "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@invalid.es> - 2016-09-12 20:30 +0200
    Re: dictation without internet? VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2016-09-13 03:02 -0500
      Re: dictation without internet? crankypuss <undisclosedUserid@gmail.com> - 2016-09-13 09:43 -0600
        Re: dictation without internet? VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2016-09-13 15:00 -0500
          Re: dictation without internet? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2016-09-13 21:02 +0000
            Re: dictation without internet? crankypuss <undisclosedUserid@gmail.com> - 2016-09-14 07:27 -0600
          Re: dictation without internet? crankypuss <undisclosedUserid@gmail.com> - 2016-09-14 07:26 -0600
      Re: dictation without internet? Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2016-09-14 09:04 +0200
        Re: dictation without internet? VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2016-09-14 03:00 -0500
          Re: dictation without internet? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2016-09-14 16:22 +0000
          Re: dictation without internet? "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@invalid.es> - 2016-09-15 02:34 +0200
            Re: dictation without internet? crankypuss <undisclosedUserid@gmail.com> - 2016-09-15 05:21 -0600
              Re: dictation without internet? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2016-09-15 19:38 +0000
                Re: dictation without internet? crankypuss <undisclosedUserid@gmail.com> - 2016-09-16 04:37 -0600
                Re: dictation without internet? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2016-09-17 20:17 +0000
              Re: dictation without internet? "W. Wesley Groleau" <Groleau+News@FreeShell.org> - 2016-09-15 18:49 -0500
                Re: dictation without internet? crankypuss <undisclosedUserid@gmail.com> - 2016-09-16 04:46 -0600
                  Re: dictation without internet? "W. Wesley Groleau" <Groleau+News@FreeShell.org> - 2016-09-17 15:52 -0500
          Re: dictation without internet? Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2016-09-15 08:40 +0200
            Re: dictation without internet? Ken Hart <kwhart1@frontier.com> - 2016-09-15 15:38 -0400
              Re: dictation without internet? Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2016-09-17 16:02 +0200
          Re: dictation without internet? "W. Wesley Groleau" <Groleau+News@FreeShell.org> - 2016-09-15 18:45 -0500
            Re: dictation without internet? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2016-09-17 20:17 +0000
              Re: dictation without internet? "W. Wesley Groleau" <Groleau+News@FreeShell.org> - 2016-09-17 15:55 -0500
              Re: dictation without internet? VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2016-09-17 16:33 -0500
                Re: dictation without internet? "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@invalid.es> - 2016-09-19 02:18 +0200
        Re: dictation without internet? "W. Wesley Groleau" <Groleau+News@FreeShell.org> - 2016-09-15 18:43 -0500
    Re: dictation without internet? Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2016-09-14 09:08 +0200
      Re: dictation without internet? VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2016-09-14 03:21 -0500
        Re: dictation without internet? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2016-09-14 16:22 +0000
          Re: dictation without internet? VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2016-09-15 17:09 -0500
            Re: dictation without internet? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2016-09-15 23:20 +0000
              Re: dictation without internet? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2016-09-16 01:16 +0000
                Re: dictation without internet? "W. Wesley Groleau" <Groleau+News@FreeShell.org> - 2016-09-17 15:59 -0500
                  Re: dictation without internet? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-17 14:06 -0700
              Re: dictation without internet? crankypuss <undisclosedUserid@gmail.com> - 2016-09-16 04:40 -0600
            Re: dictation without internet? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2016-09-16 01:14 +0000
      Re: dictation without internet? "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@invalid.es> - 2016-09-19 02:46 +0200
    Re: dictation without internet? J G Miller <miller@yoyo.ORG> - 2016-09-15 01:08 +0000
      Re: dictation without internet? crankypuss <undisclosedUserid@gmail.com> - 2016-09-15 05:31 -0600
        Re: dictation without internet? J G Miller <miller@yoyo.ORG> - 2016-09-15 16:45 +0000
          Re: dictation without internet? crankypuss <undisclosedUserid@gmail.com> - 2016-09-16 04:29 -0600
        Re: dictation without internet? crankypuss <undisclosedUserid@gmail.com> - 2016-09-16 04:21 -0600
          Re: dictation without internet? J G Miller <miller@yoyo.ORG> - 2016-09-16 16:44 +0000
      Re: dictation without internet? "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@invalid.es> - 2016-09-19 03:00 +0200

Page 2 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4  Next page →

#38814

crankypuss wrote:

> On 09/13/2016 02:02 AM, VanguardLH wrote:
>> crankypuss wrote:
>>
>>> Is there any application, free or paid, running under Android or iOS or
>>> linux, that performs dictation (voice-to-text) without requiring an
>>> internet connection?  TIA.
>>
>> Nuance's own web site (http://tinyurl.com/z6v6kag) shows $0
>> for their Anywhere app.  When I click on their Buy Now button, yep, it
>> is subscriptionware.  $15/mo, $40/qtr, or $150/yr.  However, you never
>> mentioned "free" as a requirement.  The weekly subscription is shown as
>> $0 but that's probably for the duration of a trial period.  You could
>> test it to see if it meets your needs.
> 
> I already pay a goodly sum for shitty internet access, I'm not going to 
> add another anchor to that boat: monthly fees absolutely will not fly 
> with me.

Software vendors couldn't give a gnat's fart about how much you pay for
Internet access.  They aren't ISPs.  They write code.  Your incidental
costs are irrelevant, especially since you inquired about a product that
doesn't need Internet access.  For a local app that does local audio
crunching to convert to local text, Internet access is completely a
non-issue.

The gas station attendent doesn't care how much you pay for car
insurance, either.  Not relevant to their sale (of fuel).  Not relevant
to their product (fuel).

>> You also didn't mention your Android version, and Nuance Anywhare
>> says it requires Android 4.4 or later (and iOS 8.1 or later).  I
>> suspect this is a large-sized app so you'll need to consider how
>> much free memory you have.  They don't give memory requirements on
>> their web site for that app.
> 
> Who cares what version of Android it runs under?  

Ah c'mon, even noobs understand that software has minimal requirements
for support of it within the OS, and that things change with each
version of an OS (else every new version wouldn't be a new version since
it was the same as the prior version).  There is some feature of Android
4.4 that Nuance's software requires.  Same goes for ALL SOFTWARE.  You
might find some apps that require Android 2.2 but then, again, they
aren't going to run under every version of the OS because they obviously
make use of some feature available at a minimal version of the OS.  So
you DO care about the OS version because you DO care about using
software on THAT operating system.

In fact, some apps will list a range of versions of Android under which
they will run.  Google may decide to remove features from an OS that an
app relied up, so the app cannot run under a later version of Android.
For example, there are anti-spam apps that claim to not only block spam
calls but also spam texts.  However, I think it was Android 4.3 (maybe a
late sub-minor version of 4.2) that removed the ability of these apps
from looking at your texts or blocking them.  So the anti-spam app has
lost a feature because Google took it away.  Obviously the OS version is
important to you regardless of what software solution you might choose.

Memory constraints is another criteria that you haven't bothered to take
into account.  Oh, you don't care about that either, uh huh, because you
apparently are the only user of hardware that has infinite memory
capacity.

You need to establish your criteria regarding price (now and possibly
later and perhaps repeatedly) along with hardware limitations (again
typically constrained by budget).

> When there's nothing on the market fit to buy, I tend to get a little 
> pissy about the whole modern circus, my bad, sorry.

You just contradicted yourself.  Now you're saying you would buy
something if it was "fit".  Before you said you wouldn't *buy* anything.
Make up your mind.  Do you have a requirement that the app be free?  If
so, expect crappy quality or lots of in-app ads (or even rude popup ads
that appear outside the app when you don't think it is even running).
Will you pay for a solution?  If so, you have to establish criteria as
to what you can afford and how often.  You don't get a $150/yr program
for free unless you steal it - and this is not a pro-warez newsgroup.

First decide on your criteria: budget (now and later), hardware
constraints, and OS constraints.  You seem to want a blanket solution
that provides for free an expensive commercialware app without any
hardware limitations and will run under every version of Android that
has ever existed since 2003 and will ever exist hereafter. <rolls eyes>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#38816

VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> wrote:
> crankypuss wrote:
> 
>> On 09/13/2016 02:02 AM, VanguardLH wrote:
>>> crankypuss wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Is there any application, free or paid, running under Android or iOS or
>>>> linux, that performs dictation (voice-to-text) without requiring an
>>>> internet connection?  TIA.
>>> 
>>> Nuance's own web site (http://tinyurl.com/z6v6kag) shows $0
>>> for their Anywhere app.  When I click on their Buy Now button, yep, it
>>> is subscriptionware.  $15/mo, $40/qtr, or $150/yr.  However, you never
>>> mentioned "free" as a requirement.  The weekly subscription is shown as
>>> $0 but that's probably for the duration of a trial period.  You could
>>> test it to see if it meets your needs.
>> 
>> I already pay a goodly sum for shitty internet access, I'm not going to 
>> add another anchor to that boat: monthly fees absolutely will not fly 
>> with me.
> 
> Software vendors couldn't give a gnat's fart about how much you pay for
> Internet access.  They aren't ISPs.  They write code.  Your incidental
> costs are irrelevant, especially since you inquired about a product that
> doesn't need Internet access.  For a local app that does local audio
> crunching to convert to local text, Internet access is completely a
> non-issue.
> 
> The gas station attendent doesn't care how much you pay for car
> insurance, either.  Not relevant to their sale (of fuel).  Not relevant
> to their product (fuel).
> 
>>> You also didn't mention your Android version, and Nuance Anywhare
>>> says it requires Android 4.4 or later (and iOS 8.1 or later).  I
>>> suspect this is a large-sized app so you'll need to consider how
>>> much free memory you have.  They don't give memory requirements on
>>> their web site for that app.
>> 
>> Who cares what version of Android it runs under?  
> 
> Ah c'mon, even noobs understand that software has minimal requirements
> for support of it within the OS, and that things change with each
> version of an OS (else every new version wouldn't be a new version since
> it was the same as the prior version).  There is some feature of Android
> 4.4 that Nuance's software requires.  Same goes for ALL SOFTWARE.  You
> might find some apps that require Android 2.2 but then, again, they
> aren't going to run under every version of the OS because they obviously
> make use of some feature available at a minimal version of the OS.  So
> you DO care about the OS version because you DO care about using
> software on THAT operating system.
> 
> In fact, some apps will list a range of versions of Android under which
> they will run.  Google may decide to remove features from an OS that an
> app relied up, so the app cannot run under a later version of Android.
> For example, there are anti-spam apps that claim to not only block spam
> calls but also spam texts.  However, I think it was Android 4.3 (maybe a
> late sub-minor version of 4.2) that removed the ability of these apps
> from looking at your texts or blocking them.  So the anti-spam app has
> lost a feature because Google took it away.  Obviously the OS version is
> important to you regardless of what software solution you might choose.
> 
> Memory constraints is another criteria that you haven't bothered to take
> into account.  Oh, you don't care about that either, uh huh, because you
> apparently are the only user of hardware that has infinite memory
> capacity.
> 
> You need to establish your criteria regarding price (now and possibly
> later and perhaps repeatedly) along with hardware limitations (again
> typically constrained by budget).
> 
>> When there's nothing on the market fit to buy, I tend to get a little 
>> pissy about the whole modern circus, my bad, sorry.
> 
> You just contradicted yourself.  Now you're saying you would buy
> something if it was "fit".  Before you said you wouldn't *buy* anything.
> Make up your mind.  Do you have a requirement that the app be free?  If
> so, expect crappy quality or lots of in-app ads (or even rude popup ads
> that appear outside the app when you don't think it is even running).
> Will you pay for a solution?  If so, you have to establish criteria as
> to what you can afford and how often.  You don't get a $150/yr program
> for free unless you steal it - and this is not a pro-warez newsgroup.
> 
> First decide on your criteria: budget (now and later), hardware
> constraints, and OS constraints.  You seem to want a blanket solution
> that provides for free an expensive commercialware app without any
> hardware limitations and will run under every version of Android that
> has ever existed since 2003 and will ever exist hereafter. <rolls eyes>

*slow clapping*  : )

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#38830

On 09/13/2016 03:02 PM, Jolly Roger wrote:
> VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> wrote:
>> crankypuss wrote:
>>
>>> On 09/13/2016 02:02 AM, VanguardLH wrote:
>>>> crankypuss wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Is there any application, free or paid, running under Android or iOS or
>>>>> linux, that performs dictation (voice-to-text) without requiring an
>>>>> internet connection?  TIA.
>>>>
>>>> Nuance's own web site (http://tinyurl.com/z6v6kag) shows $0
>>>> for their Anywhere app.  When I click on their Buy Now button, yep, it
>>>> is subscriptionware.  $15/mo, $40/qtr, or $150/yr.  However, you never
>>>> mentioned "free" as a requirement.  The weekly subscription is shown as
>>>> $0 but that's probably for the duration of a trial period.  You could
>>>> test it to see if it meets your needs.
>>>
>>> I already pay a goodly sum for shitty internet access, I'm not going to
>>> add another anchor to that boat: monthly fees absolutely will not fly
>>> with me.
>>
>> Software vendors couldn't give a gnat's fart about how much you pay for
>> Internet access.  They aren't ISPs.  They write code.  Your incidental
>> costs are irrelevant, especially since you inquired about a product that
>> doesn't need Internet access.  For a local app that does local audio
>> crunching to convert to local text, Internet access is completely a
>> non-issue.
>>
>> The gas station attendent doesn't care how much you pay for car
>> insurance, either.  Not relevant to their sale (of fuel).  Not relevant
>> to their product (fuel).
>>
>>>> You also didn't mention your Android version, and Nuance Anywhare
>>>> says it requires Android 4.4 or later (and iOS 8.1 or later).  I
>>>> suspect this is a large-sized app so you'll need to consider how
>>>> much free memory you have.  They don't give memory requirements on
>>>> their web site for that app.
>>>
>>> Who cares what version of Android it runs under?
>>
>> Ah c'mon, even noobs understand that software has minimal requirements
>> for support of it within the OS, and that things change with each
>> version of an OS (else every new version wouldn't be a new version since
>> it was the same as the prior version).  There is some feature of Android
>> 4.4 that Nuance's software requires.  Same goes for ALL SOFTWARE.  You
>> might find some apps that require Android 2.2 but then, again, they
>> aren't going to run under every version of the OS because they obviously
>> make use of some feature available at a minimal version of the OS.  So
>> you DO care about the OS version because you DO care about using
>> software on THAT operating system.
>>
>> In fact, some apps will list a range of versions of Android under which
>> they will run.  Google may decide to remove features from an OS that an
>> app relied up, so the app cannot run under a later version of Android.
>> For example, there are anti-spam apps that claim to not only block spam
>> calls but also spam texts.  However, I think it was Android 4.3 (maybe a
>> late sub-minor version of 4.2) that removed the ability of these apps
>> from looking at your texts or blocking them.  So the anti-spam app has
>> lost a feature because Google took it away.  Obviously the OS version is
>> important to you regardless of what software solution you might choose.
>>
>> Memory constraints is another criteria that you haven't bothered to take
>> into account.  Oh, you don't care about that either, uh huh, because you
>> apparently are the only user of hardware that has infinite memory
>> capacity.
>>
>> You need to establish your criteria regarding price (now and possibly
>> later and perhaps repeatedly) along with hardware limitations (again
>> typically constrained by budget).
>>
>>> When there's nothing on the market fit to buy, I tend to get a little
>>> pissy about the whole modern circus, my bad, sorry.
>>
>> You just contradicted yourself.  Now you're saying you would buy
>> something if it was "fit".  Before you said you wouldn't *buy* anything.
>> Make up your mind.  Do you have a requirement that the app be free?  If
>> so, expect crappy quality or lots of in-app ads (or even rude popup ads
>> that appear outside the app when you don't think it is even running).
>> Will you pay for a solution?  If so, you have to establish criteria as
>> to what you can afford and how often.  You don't get a $150/yr program
>> for free unless you steal it - and this is not a pro-warez newsgroup.
>>
>> First decide on your criteria: budget (now and later), hardware
>> constraints, and OS constraints.  You seem to want a blanket solution
>> that provides for free an expensive commercialware app without any
>> hardware limitations and will run under every version of Android that
>> has ever existed since 2003 and will ever exist hereafter. <rolls eyes>
>
> *slow clapping*  : )
>

Dunno what you're clapping about, the guy's an idiot.  I ask a question 
and the moron tries to explain me out of it.  If nobody can answer the 
goddamn question I'm wasting my time here.

-- 
http://totally-portable-software.blogspot.com
   [Sat Sep 03: "Associative Storage and Everything Everywhere"]

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#38829

On 09/13/2016 02:00 PM, VanguardLH wrote:
> crankypuss wrote:
>
>> On 09/13/2016 02:02 AM, VanguardLH wrote:
>>> crankypuss wrote:
>>>
>>>> Is there any application, free or paid, running under Android or iOS or
>>>> linux, that performs dictation (voice-to-text) without requiring an
>>>> internet connection?  TIA.
>>>
>>> Nuance's own web site (http://tinyurl.com/z6v6kag) shows $0
>>> for their Anywhere app.  When I click on their Buy Now button, yep, it
>>> is subscriptionware.  $15/mo, $40/qtr, or $150/yr.  However, you never
>>> mentioned "free" as a requirement.  The weekly subscription is shown as
>>> $0 but that's probably for the duration of a trial period.  You could
>>> test it to see if it meets your needs.
>>
>> I already pay a goodly sum for shitty internet access, I'm not going to
>> add another anchor to that boat: monthly fees absolutely will not fly
>> with me.
>

Do I really have time to dick around with this?

> Software vendors couldn't give a gnat's fart about how much you pay for
> Internet access.  They aren't ISPs.  They write code.

Having retired from a "career" as a software developer, I completely 
understand their need for greed.

>  Your incidental
> costs are irrelevant, especially since you inquired about a product that
> doesn't need Internet access.  For a local app that does local audio
> crunching to convert to local text, Internet access is completely a
> non-issue.

So which one does the job and does it well without internet access? 
What kind of box do I need to run it?  What's the bottom-line cash 
price?  I don't rent anything I can buy.

>
> The gas station attendent doesn't care how much you pay for car
> insurance, either.  Not relevant to their sale (of fuel).  Not relevant
> to their product (fuel).
>

Either stop being an ass and get down to business, or piss off.

>>> You also didn't mention your Android version, and Nuance Anywhare
>>> says it requires Android 4.4 or later (and iOS 8.1 or later).  I
>>> suspect this is a large-sized app so you'll need to consider how
>>> much free memory you have.  They don't give memory requirements on
>>> their web site for that app.
>>
>> Who cares what version of Android it runs under?
>
> Ah c'mon, even noobs understand that software has minimal requirements
> for support of it within the OS, and that things change with each
> version of an OS (else every new version wouldn't be a new version since
> it was the same as the prior version).  There is some feature of Android
> 4.4 that Nuance's software requires.  Same goes for ALL SOFTWARE.  You
> might find some apps that require Android 2.2 but then, again, they
> aren't going to run under every version of the OS because they obviously
> make use of some feature available at a minimal version of the OS.  So
> you DO care about the OS version because you DO care about using
> software on THAT operating system.

You don't get it.  I don't give a gnat's fart what kind of machine it 
takes to run the fucking thing.  If I don't already have hardware 
that'll run the software, and they require specific hardware, somebody 
out there will sell it to me.

>
> In fact, some apps will list a range of versions of Android under which
> they will run.  Google may decide to remove features from an OS that an
> app relied up, so the app cannot run under a later version of Android.
> For example, there are anti-spam apps that claim to not only block spam
> calls but also spam texts.  However, I think it was Android 4.3 (maybe a
> late sub-minor version of 4.2) that removed the ability of these apps
> from looking at your texts or blocking them.  So the anti-spam app has
> lost a feature because Google took it away.  Obviously the OS version is
> important to you regardless of what software solution you might choose.
>
> Memory constraints is another criteria that you haven't bothered to take
> into account.  Oh, you don't care about that either, uh huh, because you
> apparently are the only user of hardware that has infinite memory
> capacity.

You're boring the shit out of me.

>
> You need to establish your criteria regarding price (now and possibly
> later and perhaps repeatedly) along with hardware limitations (again
> typically constrained by budget).

I already did that.  I will not rent.  Cash up front on proof of quality.

>
>> When there's nothing on the market fit to buy, I tend to get a little
>> pissy about the whole modern circus, my bad, sorry.
>
> You just contradicted yourself.

You just proved yourself to be an idiot.

>  Now you're saying you would buy
> something if it was "fit".  Before you said you wouldn't *buy* anything.

I said I wouldn't *rent* anything.

> Make up your mind.  Do you have a requirement that the app be free?  If
> so, expect crappy quality or lots of in-app ads (or even rude popup ads
> that appear outside the app when you don't think it is even running).
> Will you pay for a solution?  If so, you have to establish criteria as
> to what you can afford and how often.  You don't get a $150/yr program
> for free unless you steal it - and this is not a pro-warez newsgroup.
>
> First decide on your criteria: budget (now and later), hardware
> constraints, and OS constraints.  You seem to want a blanket solution
> that provides for free an expensive commercialware app without any
> hardware limitations and will run under every version of Android that
> has ever existed since 2003 and will ever exist hereafter. <rolls eyes>
>

You sir are a fool and a waste of my time.  Thank you nonetheless.

-- 
http://totally-portable-software.blogspot.com
   [Sat Sep 03: "Associative Storage and Everything Everywhere"]

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#38824

VanguardLH schrieb am 2016-09-13 um 10:02:

[...]
> The app's description at the Google Play store doesn't mention price (or
> mention it is free) and no mention of in-app purchases or ads.  So I
> can't tell if it is truly free (no ads as the cost) or if it is even
> free.  One reviewer noted a subscription price of £15/month which seems
> damn high. Nuance's own web site (http://tinyurl.com/z6v6kag) shows $0
[...]

"Dragon Anywhere is a professional-grade, cloud-based dictation solution"

Well - "cloud-based" looks like "we send the recorded voice online to a
server and get the text back". That's why they want money on a monthly
basis. As long you pay, you can use the *online* service.


-- 
Arno Welzel
https://arnowelzel.de
http://de-rec-fahrrad.de
http://fahrradzukunft.de

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#38827

Arno Welzel wrote:

> VanguardLH schrieb am 2016-09-13 um 10:02:
> 
> [...]
>> The app's description at the Google Play store doesn't mention price (or
>> mention it is free) and no mention of in-app purchases or ads.  So I
>> can't tell if it is truly free (no ads as the cost) or if it is even
>> free.  One reviewer noted a subscription price of £15/month which seems
>> damn high. Nuance's own web site (http://tinyurl.com/z6v6kag) shows $0
> [...]
> 
> "Dragon Anywhere is a professional-grade, cloud-based dictation solution"
> 
> Well - "cloud-based" looks like "we send the recorded voice online to a
> server and get the text back". That's why they want money on a monthly
> basis. As long you pay, you can use the *online* service.

Therein lies a fundamental defect in expecting smartphone or tablets to
replace desktops much less servers or a meshed network of them.  Users
want toy computers to do massive computing, like buying a shovel to
replace their sod instead of renting a bobcat.

I did find in Anywhere's system requirements the statement "Active Wi-Fi
or cellular connection".  A slow transfer rate to get the audio data up
to the server would impact responsiveness of the app for seeing when the
text got delivered back from the server.  That's probably why Betts
noted the slowness of using the Google transcription feature: takes time
to upload the audio data, wait for the server to crunch it, and to get
the text from the server.

They also mention "By using Dragon Anywhere, you expressly consent and
agree that Speech Data, which may contain personal information, shall be
stored and processed in the United States. “Speech Data” means the audio
files, associated text, transcriptions and log files provided by you or
generated in connection with Nuance Products."  So where you are could
also affect responsiveness, like you're stuck with a route that with
long delay (i.e., slow hosts as hops in the overseas/intercontinental
route from you to USA server).

I'm not surprised that Anywhere is a front end to the actual computation
that needs far more powerful computers to process the data up "in the
cloud" (which, to me, is just marketspeak for a client-server config).
This harkens back to when employees used dumb terminals to run programs
on the server.  The workstations didn't have the power to do the work
and employers weren't going to buy racks of servers for each employee.

What the OP wants is no Internet connection required for a local app to
do speech analysis across many languages and variations and also do the
transcription immediately and do it for dirt cheap.  I want a woman that
never argues with me and a 3-course t-bone meal for $2.  Dream on.

As for the suggestion that I gave, cranky said "it's mortally slow".
Maybe he has a slow wifi connection, or no wifi and his cellular data
rate is slow.  For me, the text appeared almost as fast as I spoke.
Yes, there are inaccuracies.  This feature has no per-user learning
feature as would a robust speech analyzer.  You don't get to record a
vocabulary of keywords to identify punctuation.  Geez, what does he
expect for FREE?  It's clear he isn't going to pay for anything better.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#38831

VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> wrote:
> 
> Yes, there are inaccuracies.  This feature has no per-user learning
> feature as would a robust speech analyzer.  You don't get to record a
> vocabulary of keywords to identify punctuation.  Geez, what does he
> expect for FREE?  It's clear he isn't going to pay for anything better.

Siri on iOS has its inaccuracies as well, but it allows you to correct
pronunciation of words, recognize people by nickname like "my wife", and so
on, and it's free. Of course it, too, requires an Internet connection. : )

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#38834

On 2016-09-14 10:00, VanguardLH wrote:

> What the OP wants is no Internet connection required for a local app to
> do speech analysis across many languages and variations and also do the
> transcription immediately and do it for dirt cheap.  I want a woman that
> never argues with me and a 3-course t-bone meal for $2.  Dream on.

No. The OP did not ask for many languages, nor do it cheap. The only
requirement was that it had to be local, without Internet. Nor did he
specify a size of machine or type of machine.

-- 
Cheers,
       Carlos E.R.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#38839

On 09/14/2016 06:34 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
> On 2016-09-14 10:00, VanguardLH wrote:
>
>> What the OP wants is no Internet connection required for a local app to
>> do speech analysis across many languages and variations and also do the
>> transcription immediately and do it for dirt cheap.  I want a woman that
>> never argues with me and a 3-course t-bone meal for $2.  Dream on.
>
> No. The OP did not ask for many languages, nor do it cheap. The only
> requirement was that it had to be local, without Internet. Nor did he
> specify a size of machine or type of machine.
>

In addition to being local (non-internet) it needs to actually work, 
which is kind of assumed.  And it has to run on something I can 
physically carry around, not some mainframe complex that would require a 
new building and additional infrastructure.  English is plenty, it's the 
only language I speak.

I asked what I thought was a fairly simple question.  Is such a device 
available to consumers and where can it be purchased?

I'm not sure why that's so difficult, it's "yes, xxxx", "nothing 
exists", or "i dunno".

What I read instead is posturing by those who don't know the answer, 
presume that I'm just as cheap as they are, then attempt to educate me, 
apparently so they can feel better cuz I been educated already, I been 
to college, I raised a family by cranking better code than the next guy, 
I know how some of this stuff works.

I don't get it.  Why do we waste our time on discussion groups filled 
with trolls and others who are grasp at any opportunity to puff 
themselves up?  Better yet, why is our "civilization" such that the 
emotionally needy comprise its majority?

Why do people assume that price is the first and only consideration?

First you find out if there's anything available that's actually worth 
buying, *then* you shop and/or negotiate price.  If nothing's available 
it doesn't make any difference whether it's expensive, cheap, or free, 
there ain't no such animal so price is irrelevant.  One you find out 
what you'd bother to own, you can either buy it or you can't.  Easy-peasey.

The advertising and credit industries have been way too successful imo. 
I've read half a dozen articles lately on the new phones.  Lots of fancy 
crap like better ways to play music while you pick your nose.  People 
are eating this shit up like there's no tomorrow.

I don't get it, so maybe there really is no tomorrow.

-- 
http://totally-portable-software.blogspot.com
   [Sat Sep 03: "Associative Storage and Everything Everywhere"]

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#38847

In message <nre14u$c14$1@dont-email.me> 
  crankypuss <undisclosedUserid@gmail.com> wrote:
> I asked what I thought was a fairly simple question.  Is such a device 
> available to consumers and where can it be purchased?

No, nothing like that exists.

You need an Internet connection or a desktop computer.

-- 
"We're philosophers. We think, therefore we am."

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#38859

On 09/15/2016 01:38 PM, Lewis wrote:
> In message <nre14u$c14$1@dont-email.me>
>   crankypuss <undisclosedUserid@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I asked what I thought was a fairly simple question.  Is such a device
>> available to consumers and where can it be purchased?
>
> No, nothing like that exists.
>
> You need an Internet connection or a desktop computer.
>

Forget the internet connection.  I'm one of the few people in the States 
who won't shit his pants if the internet suddenly goes away, because my 
connectivity is so bad I'm used to working mostly without it.

The distinction between laptops and desktops is a little blurry to me 
today.  If I was to learn, for example, that Apple's Siri worked on a 
MacBook with no internet connection, I'd might run flat out of excuses 
not to buy one.

But I have some trust issues.  I saw the salesman at the Apple store 
speak and I saw text come out on the screen, but at the time I knew 
nothing about Apple devices and couldn't tell if it was connected or 
not.  I'm pretty sure it was, the place positively hums with wifi. 
Anyway I think I asked if it worked without internet and I think he 
grunted in the affirmative, but it damn sure doesn't work without 
internet.  In fact I'm holding off on the iOS 10 install because I'm 
afraid it might make it more difficult to turn off the useless Siri 
component than it already is.

-- 
http://totally-portable-software.blogspot.com
   [Sat Sep 03: "Associative Storage and Everything Everywhere"]

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#38917

Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
> In message <nre14u$c14$1@dont-email.me> 
>   crankypuss <undisclosedUserid@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I asked what I thought was a fairly simple question.  Is such a device 
> > available to consumers and where can it be purchased?
> 
> No, nothing like that exists.
> 
> You need an Internet connection or a desktop computer.

  Why "a desktop computer"? Why not a laptop, laptop-like device, etc.?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#38852

On 09-15-2016 06:21, crankypuss wrote:
> In addition to being local (non-internet) it needs to actually work,
> which is kind of assumed.  And it has to run on something I can
> physically carry around,

And you already got at least one answer: doesn't exist.

So why waste time arguing about it, unless arguing is what you really 
came here for?

Then again, can you be more precise about "can physically carry around"?

I physically carry around my Macbook Pro 90% of the time, and it does 
Dictation off-line.  Does an excellent job on single sentences.  Sucks 
if you want to do a whole paragraph.

-- 
Wes Groleau

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#38861

On 09/15/2016 05:49 PM, W. Wesley Groleau wrote:
> On 09-15-2016 06:21, crankypuss wrote:
>> In addition to being local (non-internet) it needs to actually work,
>> which is kind of assumed.  And it has to run on something I can
>> physically carry around,
>
> And you already got at least one answer: doesn't exist.
>
> So why waste time arguing about it, unless arguing is what you really
> came here for?
>
> Then again, can you be more precise about "can physically carry around"?
>
> I physically carry around my Macbook Pro 90% of the time, and it does
> Dictation off-line.  Does an excellent job on single sentences.  Sucks
> if you want to do a whole paragraph.
>

Then it doesn't work, right?  If you wouldn't use it to dictate a book, 
it won't do the job.

-- 
http://totally-portable-software.blogspot.com
   [Sat Sep 03: "Associative Storage and Everything Everywhere"]

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#38924

On 09-16-2016 05:46, crankypuss wrote:
> On 09/15/2016 05:49 PM, W. Wesley Groleau wrote:
>> I physically carry around my Macbook Pro 90% of the time, and it does
>> Dictation off-line.  Does an excellent job on single sentences.  Sucks
>> if you want to do a whole paragraph.
>
> Then it doesn't work, right?  If you wouldn't use it to dictate a book,
> it won't do the job.

It used to be fantastic.  But now it acts like the buffer size has been 
reduced so that I have to stop and wait for it to catch up after every 
sentence.  If I forget, it stops listening and I have to turn it off and 
back on.  The delays are such that typing is almost as fast.

Now, if I don't say anything else, people will advise me to buy more RAM 
or a faster disk.  But in fact, I have eight gig of RAM and an SSD 
that's 600 gig empty.

-- 
Wes Groleau

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#38837

VanguardLH schrieb am 2016-09-14 um 10:00:

[...]
> What the OP wants is no Internet connection required for a local app to
> do speech analysis across many languages and variations and also do the
> transcription immediately and do it for dirt cheap.  I want a woman that
> never argues with me and a 3-course t-bone meal for $2.  Dream on.

No - the OP asked for voice-to-speech without the need for an online
connection. I did *not* say it has to be free or very cheap:

"Is there any application, free or paid, running under Android or iOS or
linux, that performs dictation (voice-to-text) without requiring an
internet connection?  TIA."


-- 
Arno Welzel
https://arnowelzel.de
http://de-rec-fahrrad.de
http://fahrradzukunft.de

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#38846

On 09/15/2016 02:40 AM, Arno Welzel wrote:
> VanguardLH schrieb am 2016-09-14 um 10:00:
>
> [...]
>> What the OP wants is no Internet connection required for a local app to
>> do speech analysis across many languages and variations and also do the
>> transcription immediately and do it for dirt cheap.  I want a woman that
>> never argues with me and a 3-course t-bone meal for $2.  Dream on.
>
> No - the OP asked for voice-to-speech without the need for an online
> connection. I did *not* say it has to be free or very cheap:
>
> "Is there any application, free or paid, running under Android or iOS or
> linux, that performs dictation (voice-to-text) without requiring an
> internet connection?  TIA."
>
>
I pasted the above quoted paragraph into Google, and the second hit was 
this page:
https://zapier.com/blog/best-text-dictation-software/
which listed several programs and apps. Some were definitely online, but 
some appeared to be offline. I didn't check them out.
-- 
Ken Hart
kwhart1@frontier.com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#38908

Ken Hart schrieb am 2016-09-15 um 21:38:

> I pasted the above quoted paragraph into Google, and the second hit was 
> this page:
> https://zapier.com/blog/best-text-dictation-software/
> which listed several programs and apps. Some were definitely online, but 
> some appeared to be offline. I didn't check them out.

This lists:

Apple Dictation - not for Android
Windows Speech Recognition - not for Android
Google Docs Voice Typing - online in Google Docs in a browser
Dragon NaturallySpeaking - online only

I think the OP could do a Google search as well. Before posting just a
hit on Google you shouldn't answer at all.


-- 
Arno Welzel
https://arnowelzel.de
http://de-rec-fahrrad.de
http://fahrradzukunft.de

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#38851

On 09-14-2016 03:00, VanguardLH wrote:
> What the OP wants is no Internet connection required for a local app to
> do speech analysis across many languages and variations and also do the
> transcription immediately and do it for dirt cheap.

And it exists.  But not for phones.


-- 
Wes Groleau

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#38916

W. Wesley Groleau <Groleau+News@freeshell.org> wrote:
> On 09-14-2016 03:00, VanguardLH wrote:
> > What the OP wants is no Internet connection required for a local app to
> > do speech analysis across many languages and variations and also do the
> > transcription immediately and do it for dirt cheap.
> 
> And it exists.  But not for phones.

  He did not limit his platforms to "phones". Actually he did not even
mention phones, at least not in his OP (and AFAIR not since).

  OTOH, he seemed to have dropped Linux as a possible platform.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | alt.os.linux

csiph-web